A federal judge in Kentucky issued a preliminary injunction effectively blocking implementation of President Joe Biden's COVID-19 vaccine mandate for federal government contractors and subcontractors on Tuesday.
U.S. District Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove, who serves the Eastern District of Kentucky, issued the opinion and order Tuesday afternoon. It came in response to a challenge from Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, who joined many other state attorneys general in challenging the mandate.
"This is not a case about whether vaccines are effective. They are," Van Tatenhove wrote. "Nor is this a case about whether the government, at some level, and in some circumstances, can require citizens to obtain vaccines. It can."
He said that the question before him was a narrow one: whether or not Biden had the authority to impose vaccines on the employees of federal contractors and subcontractors.
"In all likelihood, the answer to that question is no," Van Tatenhove wrote.
The scope of the injunction applies to Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee, per the order.
Van Tatenhove noted in the order that over $10.2 billion worth of federal contracts was performed in Kentucky in 2020. That figure was roughly the same in Tennessee and amounted to more than $8.9 billion in Ohio.
One key argument of the U.S. government that received some pushback was President Biden's use of a procurement statute to justify the mandate for contractors and subcontractors. Van Tatenhove wrote that "even for a good cause" like limiting the spread of COVID-19, Biden could not go beyond his congressionally delegated authority in implementing the statute.
"It strains credulity that Congress intended... a procurement statute to be the basis for promulgating a public health measure such as mandatory vaccination," Van Tatenhove wrote. "If a vaccination mandate has a close enough nexus to economy and efficiency in federal procurement, then the statute could be used to enact virtually any measure at the president's whim under the guise of economy and efficiency."
Though the judge granted Cameron's motion for a preliminary injunction, Van Tatenhove also pushed back on some of the arguments made by the Attorney General that some in the federal government operated in bad faith and skirted administrative procedure.
Overall, the judge wrote that the court system is likely to continue to grapple with such questions regarding COVID-19 limitation measures as the pandemic lingers.
"These questions will not be finally resolved in the shadows," Van Tatenhove wrote. "Instead, the consideration will continue with the benefit of full briefing and appellate review. But right now, the enforcement of the contract provisions in this case must be paused."
The mandate — which, along with one for employers of over 100 people and certain healthcare workers, has been challenged in several states — is set to take effect on Jan. 4.
Relatedly, a federal court in Louisiana issued a nationwide injunction against the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for certain healthcare workers on Tuesday.
