Constitutional Challenges to the OSHA COVID-19 Vaccination Mandate

• Author: Paul J. Larkin
• Position: John, Barbara & Victoria Rumpel Senior Legal Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation; M.P. P. George Washington University, 2010; J.D. Stanford Law School, 1980; B.A. Washington & Lee University, 1977
• Pages: 367-379

Constitutional Challenges to the OSHA COVID-19

Vaccination Mandate

PAUL J. LARKIN*

ABSTRACT

Acting pursuant to a presidential directive, in November 2021 the

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued an order, known

as a federal “emergency temporary standard” (ETS), requiring private busi-

nesses with 100 or more employees to ensure that every employee is vaccinated

against COVID-19 or, if unvaccinated, to wear a face covering in the workplace

and present a negative test result on a weekly basis. Numerous parties filed suit,

arguing that OSHA lacks the authority to issue the ETS and that, even if OSHA

has that power, the ETS is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court of the United

States concluded that OSHA appears to lack that authority and stayed the ETS

pending the completion of the litigation. If OSHA now turns to Congress for au-

thorization, Congress will need to resolve the constitutional issues. In that

event, most of the constitutional challenges—viz., ones based on the Due

Process Clause, Free Exercise Clause, or Fourth Amendment—are unlikely to

prevail. The likelihood of success on a Commerce Clause challenge is uncertain

at present.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368

I. THE COMMERCE CLAUSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370

II. THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372

III. THE FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376

IV. THE FOURTH AMENDMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377

CONCLUSION .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 379

* John, Barbara & Victoria Rumpel Senior Legal Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation; M.P.

P. George Washington University, 2010; J.D. Stanford Law School, 1980; B.A. Washington & Lee

University, 1977. The views expressed in this Article are the author’s own and should not be construed

as representing any official position of The Heritage Foundation. I am grateful to Doug Badger, Josh

Blackman, Marie Fishpaw, Joel Griffith, and John G. Malcolm for helpful comments on an earlier

iteration of this Article. I also want to thank Maxwell Myrhum, Alex Phipps, and Katherine Williams

Wiegand for invaluable research assistance. Any errors are mine. © 2022, Paul J. Larkin.

367