Mandate mayhem: Rutgers faces continuing litigation regarding its coronavirus vaccine mandate

Rutgers continues to face legal action against its campus-wide coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccine mandate that allows for few exemptions.

In August 2021, the Children's Heath Defense (CHD), a non-profit organization known for its stance against vaccines, filed a case against the University, opposing the latter's COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

The district court sided with Rutgers and ruled that the vaccine mandate was constitutional, a decision the CHD continues to oppose and has since filed an appeal against.

In a press release announcing the appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, the CHD said the vaccine is experimental, and Rutgers does not have the authority to impose this requirement with a vaccine whose effects are still largely unknown. Mary Holland, CHD president, is one of the lawyers representing the organization.

"It's unacceptable for Rutgers or any other school to coerce students and employees to take experimental medications to attend school or to be employed," Holland said in the press release. "We are confident that this vaccine mandate will ultimately be found unconstitutional."

In a statement to The Daily Targum, University spokesperson Dory Devlin said that the University has the legal authority for a vaccine requirement and its stance is consistent with the law.

"We remain committed to creating a safe campus environment and to support the health and safety for all members of the Rutgers community," Devlin said.

Marge Drozd, the director of Community Health Services for Saint Peter's University Hospital, said that COVID-19 education is crucial in shaping people’s decisions about vaccine administration and that vaccine mandates raise awareness of public health issues.

Through clinics and the hospital’s mobile health unit in New Brunswick, the health care provider has administered approximately 40,000 vaccines, she said. Evidently, initial citizens who were hesitant did choose to take the vaccine after being provided explanations of the vaccine and its potential side effects.

"I was very happy to tell you the truth when they had that (the vaccine mandate) at Rutgers because it showed me how foresightful Rutgers administration was in terms of protecting not only fellow students but your staff and your teachers and also the greater community,” Drozd said.

Dorit Reiss, a professor of law at the University of California College of the Law, San Francisco, said Rutgers has a strong case with respect to maintaining its mandate because of the long history of the court system supporting school vaccine requirements.

She said the legal precedent is that entities, for public health reasons, can restrict people's rights if the measures can be demonstrated to be helpful and reasonable.

"Universities are a shared community, people share spaces. They can't really avoid that. So individual decisions like vaccination will affect the public in multiple ways. It rests on a pretty solid, reasonable foundation," Reiss said.

Samia Alam, a School of Arts and Sciences junior, said that despite the many challenges Rutgers dealt with regarding COVID-19, she believes the University kept the safety of its students as a top priority.

"I think the University did a good job with understanding the severity of the case of (COVID-19) and how rapidly it was spreading," she said. "They chose to make a mandate for everybody to get vaccinated, which I think was just for something that could be possibly in their control in such an uncontrollable event."

The University has made efforts to provide accurate information about COVID-19 and keep students updated, Alan said. As cases decline, a gradual transition away from face coverings aids students in returning to pre-pandemic life, she said.

Universities around the country have faced lawsuits against their vaccine mandates, including prominent cases in California, Connecticut, Indiana and Michigan, Reiss said.

"There are many cases in the courts against university mandates. Almost all of them failed. One exception is a Dahl versus trustees of a university in Michigan," she said

The case against the University of Western Michigan differed and ultimately failed because the religious exemption it offered was not universal, and the court eventually ruled against the school, she said.

Rutgers offers exemptions for religious reasons, which makes for a much stronger case and aligns the University closer to the success of several other cases around the nation, Reiss said.

Heidi Leung, a School of Engineering sophomore, said she appreciated the approach Rutgers took toward mitigating the risks of COVID-19, especially its vaccine mandate.

"I'm an out-of-state student, and my grandma lives with me, so it was just kind of like, 'Oh if I brought COVID-19 back, I would be really upset,' and also it is like a courtesy to my roommates as well,” Leung said.

She said the University has been transparent about vaccine exemptions, and she personally has not experienced any opposition to the mandate while living on the Busch campus. Though, she has heard about protests on other Rutgers campuses occurring in the past.

Opposition to University-wide vaccine mandates is not a new issue, and schools have faced scrutiny and even lawsuits in the past, Reiss said. But with COVID-19 being so visible and politicized, the issue over such mandates has become much more widespread, she said.

Drozd said there is a possibility that another pandemic may come, and she continues to stand with vaccine mandates — such as those for the flu — which have been established in the health care system for years.

"I believe in vaccines. I have seen when children get sick with something that could be prevented by a vaccine, and it is not pretty," she said. "So, the more we can protect our kids, our bodies, from these diseases, the better it is."