Florida Judge Halts City’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate

https://img.theepochtimes.com/assets...ne-700x420.jpg
A health care worker prepares a COVID-19 vaccine in Florida in a file photograph. (Chandan Khanna/AFP via Getty Images)

FLORIDA
Florida Judge Halts City’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate

By Zachary Stieber

September 22, 2021 Updated: September 22, 2021

A judge in Florida on Wednesday blocked a city’s COVID-19 mandate from taking effect.
Circuit Judge Monica Brasington, a Sen. Rick Scott appointee, granted a request for an emergency injunction. That means the mandate, which was slated to take effect on Oct. 1, is blocked for now.
“The city did not put on any evidence, at all, at the injunction hearing,” Brasington wrote in a 7-page ruling.
“Without any evidence, the court is unable to consider whether the vaccine mandate serves a compelling interest through the least restrictive means, whether the vaccine mandate meets a strict scrutiny test, a rational basis test, or whether it meets any other standard,” she added.
Gainesville’s City Commission on Aug. 5 decided all city employees needed to get vaccinated against the virus that causes COVID-19. A week later, City Manager Lee Feldman ordered employees to get at least one dose by Oct. 1 and be fully vaccinated by Oct. 14.
More than 200 Gainesville employees sued, noting that the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in stopping transmission of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus has stopped. They also said that the mandate did not make sense because many of them have natural immunity, or protection from having had COVID-19, and because area hospitals were not experiencing a shortage of beds.
In a recent hearing, the employees argued that the mandate violated their right to privacy under the Florida Constitution.
That means defendants have to show that the law “furthers a compelling state interest in the least restrictive way,” Judge Brasington said.
But the city submitted no evidence, called no witnesses, and did not file any affidavits or declarations, leading the judge to rule in favor of the plaintiffs.
“The city had an opportunity to present evidence that would show that this Vaccine Mandate was the least restrictive means to meet a compelling government interest. The city did not do that and, in fact, did not present any evidence, at all. Therefore, the court is required to find that the city failed to meet its burden of proving that the vaccine mandate furthers a compelling state interest in the least restrictive way,” she ruled.
The city is prohibited from enforcing the mandate and firing or disciplining any employee who fails to comply with it.
“The court agreed that the city doesn’t own its employees’ bodies,” Jeff Childers, an attorney for the plaintiffs, told The Epoch Times.
Jon Cicio, one of the plaintiffs, said he was relieved.
“It feels like a huge weight has been lifted off my shoulders. I can get back to focusing on serving the citizens the way they deserve, with no distraction,” he told The Epoch Times.
Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody, a Republican who filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs, also celebrated the ruling.
“I was proud to stand with police and first responders to stop the city of Gainesville from firing them based on an unlawful government vaccine mandate. Today, the court agreed and protected their jobs. This is great news,” she wrote on Twitter.
A lawyer for Gainesville declined to comment.

Florida Judge Halts City’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate (theepochtimes.com)

.

See DARRIS FRIEND V CITY OF GAINESVILLE . . . Case No. 01-2021-CA-2412, where the Court has issued an injunction against the mandate.

Here is a LINK to the injunction, part of which reads:

.
.
12. The City’s Vaccine Mandate requires City employees to receive a complete dose of the COVID-19 vaccines. These vaccinations are administered through intramuscular 3 injection. The City’s Vaccine Mandate requires a compulsory vaccination procedure that can reasonably be considered a form of medical treatment and/or a medical procedure, and thus, this mandate implicates the City employees’ fundamental right to privacy.

*13. If a challenged law implicates Florida’s right to privacy, the burden shifts to the government to prove that the law furthers a compelling state interest in the least restrictive way —also known as the “strict scrutiny” standard. Gainesville Woman Care, LLC v. State, 210 So. 3d 1243, 1252-1253 (Fla. 2017); see also, Green v. Alachua County, 2021 WL 2387983 at 3.

14. This “strict scrutiny” standard applies equally to constitutional challenges in instances when the government seeks to enforce laws, and also, in instances when the government employer seeks to enforce workplace policies. See City of N. Miami v. Kurtz, 653 So. 2d 1025, 1028 (Fla. 1995).

*15. If the government fails to put on evidence of its compelling state interest, as the City failed to do here, the Court is not required to (and, in fact, cannot) make factual findings that the government has any compelling state interest. Green, 2021 WL 2387983 at 3 (“When the government fails to offer evidence to demonstrate a compelling state interest, the trial court then is absolved of having to make any finding to that effect”). In the instant case, the City failed to put on any evidence that the Vaccine Mandate serves a compelling state interest or that the Vaccine Mandate was the least restrictive means to accomplish that interest.

*16. The City’s Vaccine Mandate facially interferes with its employees’ right to refuse unwanted medical treatments and/or procedures, implicates Plaintiffs’ fundamental right to privacy, and is “presumptively unconstitutional.” Gainesville Woman Care, LLC., 210 So. 3d at 1245; and Green, 2021 WL 2387983 at 5.

JWK

.
I wonder how many fully vaccinated, who are unknowingly carrying a viral load and spreading it, there are.


I also wonder how many people have acquired natural immunity, and are covid free, have been discriminated against by government mandates and deprived of enjoying public accommodations, or even worse, have been fired from their job even though they present the same risk as a fully vaccinated employee is, and who may be spreading the virus.


JWK


"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law __1858

.

Gainesville rescinds requirement for city workers to get COVID shots

Gainesville commission tosses out vaccination mandate day after judge blocks it

Well, the City of Gainesville sure shut up fast when the alternative was to defend their unconstitutional mandate in court.

JWK

Let us never forget. There is now both domestic and foreign blood on the hands of all those who voted for the Biden/Harris ticket.