Does 1-6 v. Mills

Citation566 F.Supp.3d 34
Decision Date13 October 2021
Docket Number1:21-cv-00242-JDL
Parties Jane DOES 1-6 et al., Plaintiffs, v. Janet T. MILLS, in Her Official Capacity as Governor of the State of Maine, et al., Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Maine

Daniel J. Schmid, Pro Hac Vice, Horatio G. Mihet, Pro Hac Vice, Mathew D. Staver, Pro Hac Vice, Roger K. Gannam, Pro Hac Vice, Liberty Counsel, Orlando, FL, Stephen C. Whiting, The Whiting Law Firm, Portland, ME, for Plaintiffs.

Kimberly L. Patwardhan, Thomas A. Knowlton, Valerie A. Wright, Office of the Attorney General, Augusta, ME, for Defendants Janet T. Mills, Jeanne M. Lambrew, Dr. Nirav D. Shah.

Katharine I. Rand, James R. Erwin, Pierce Atwood LLP, Portland, ME, for Defendants Mainehealth, Genesis Healthcare of Maine LLC, Genesis Healthcare LLC, Mainegeneral Health.

Katherine Lee Porter, Eaton Peabody, Portland, ME, Ryan P. Dumais, Eaton Peabody, Brunswick, ME, for Defendant Northern Light Health Foundation.

ORDER ON PLAINTIFFSMOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

JON D. LEVY, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs, eight individual healthcare workers and one individual healthcare provider, seek a preliminary injunction (ECF No. 3) prohibiting Janet T. Mills, Maine's Governor, and other named defendants from requiring all employees of designated healthcare facilities to be vaccinated against the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus—the cause of COVID-19 infections—through the enforcement of the rule, Immunization Requirements for Healthcare Workers, 10-144-264 Me. Code R. §§ 1-7 (2021)1 (the "Rule"), as amended August 12, 2021. The Plaintiffs contend that the vaccination

requirement violates their First Amendment and other federal constitutional and statutory rights because it does not exempt from its requirements individuals whose sincerely held religious beliefs cause them to object to being vaccinated against COVID-19. Seven of the nine plaintiffs also contend that their employers violated federal employment law by refusing to grant them a religious exemption from the vaccination requirement.

The Plaintiffs’ five-count Complaint (ECF No. 1) names as defendants, in their official capacities, Governor Mills; Dr. Nirav D. Shah, the Director of Maine CDC; and Jeanne M. Lambrew, the Commissioner of the Maine Department of Health and Human Services ("DHHS") (the "State Defendants"). The Complaint also names five incorporated entities that operate healthcare facilities in Maine: Defendants Genesis Healthcare of Maine, LLC; Genesis Healthcare, LLC; Northern Light Health Foundation; MaineHealth; and MaineGeneral Health (the "Hospital Defendants").

The Rule requires all employees of designated healthcare facilities2 to receive their final dose of the vaccination

against the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus by September 17, 2021. 10-144-264 Me. Code R. § 5(A)(7) (effective Aug. 12, 2021). On September 2, 2021, the DHHS and Maine CDC announced that they would not begin enforcing the Rule's provisions until October 29, 2021, to allow additional time for employees of designated healthcare facilities to comply with the Rule by receiving their final vaccine dose by October 15. ECF No. 49-5 at ¶ 37. If granted, the preliminary injunction would prohibit the Defendants from enforcing the Rule or terminating the Plaintiffs’ employment based on their refusal to be vaccinated against COVID-19.

A hearing on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction was held on September 20, 2021.3 After careful consideration and for the reasons that follow, I deny the Plaintiffs’ motion. (ECF No 3).

II. BACKGROUND

The parties have filed declarations and various exhibits in support of their positions. Except where otherwise noted, I have based my findings on these documents.4 Additionally, I take judicial notice of certain additional facts pertinent to the Motion. See In re Colonial Mortgage Bankers Corp. , 324 F.3d 12, 20 (1st Cir. 2003) (noting that although a district court is generally limited to examining the record, it may also consider "the documents incorporated by reference in it, matters of public record, and other matters susceptible to judicial notice"); see also Loucka v. Lincoln Nat'l Life Ins. Co. , 334 F. Supp. 3d 1, 8-9 (D.D.C. 2018) ("[T]he CDC's Lyme-testing criteria and procedures are a matter of public record, and it cannot be reasonably questioned that the agency's website is an accurate source for those standards.").

To provide the necessary background, I begin by addressing: (A) COVID-19 and Maine's response; (B) the asserted religious beliefs that cause Plaintiffs to refuse to be vaccinated against COVID-19; and (C) the origin of the emergency rulemaking that required that healthcare workers be vaccinated against COVID-19.

A. The COVID-19 Global Pandemic

COVID-19 is a highly contagious disease that can cause serious illness and death. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶¶ 11, 13, 15. In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 to be a global pandemic. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 12. As of September 12, 2021, there were approximately 219 million cases of COVID-19 worldwide. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 13. Globally, over 4,550,000 people have died from COVID-19, including approximately 660,000 deaths in the United States. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 13. As of September 14, 2021, Maine had 81,177 total cases of COVID-19, with 969 deaths. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 14.

Variants of the virus have emerged over the course of the pandemic. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 20. The Delta variant, which is now the predominant variant of all COVID-19 cases in the United States, ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 50, is more than twice as contagious as previous variants, ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 22. As of August 27, 2021, the Delta variant accounted for 96.7% of all positive COVID-19 samples sequenced in Maine. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 50. A higher level of contagiousness necessitates a correspondingly higher vaccination

rate among the public to achieve "herd immunity."5 ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 28. With the emergence of the Delta variant, epidemiological models have increased the projected vaccination rate needed to achieve herd immunity from 70% to 90%. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 29.

Three COVID-19 vaccines are generally available: Pfizer-BioNTech (the "Pfizer vaccine"), Moderna, and Janssen (the "J&J vaccine"). ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 40. All three are effective against the Delta variant. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 43. Prior to their availability, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("CDC") and Maine CDC recommended that people wear face coverings and practice physical distancing to limit the spread of the virus. ECF No. 49-5 at ¶ 5. Once the first vaccine doses became available in December 2020, Maine CDC prioritized the vaccination

of frontline healthcare professionals and patient-facing staff through its eligibility guidelines. ECF No. 49-5 at ¶¶ 15-18. The vaccines are now widely available, and the State has worked in parallel with hospital systems to encourage and facilitate the widespread vaccination of Maine residents. ECF No. 49-5 at ¶¶ 19(f), 23-29.

The Rule was amended in August 2021 to add COVID-19 to the list of infectious diseases for which vaccinations

are mandated for employees of designated healthcare facilities. It represented the latest in a series of measures employed by the State to combat the COVID-19 pandemic in healthcare settings. When formulating the amendment, Maine CDC reviewed and considered alternatives to mandating vaccinations, including the measures then being employed by Maine healthcare facilities, such as twice-weekly or daily testing, symptom monitoring, and the use of personal protective equipment ("PPE"). ECF No. 49-4 at ¶¶ 59-64. Maine CDC rejected twice-weekly testing as inadequate given the speed at which the Delta variant is transmitted—a person infected with the Delta variant can transmit the infection to others within just 24 to 36 hours of exposure. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶¶ 25, 61. Similarly, Maine CDC rejected daily antigen testing as insufficient because the most effective tests (polymerase-chain-reaction tests ("PCR")) require 24 to 72 hours to produce results and the faster rapid-antigen tests are too inaccurate and in short supply. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 62. Symptom monitoring as a standalone measure was rejected because the virus can be transmitted by persons who are asymptomatic. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 60. Similarly, sole reliance on the use of PPE was rejected because, even if worn correctly, PPE will not stop the spread of COVID-19 in healthcare settings. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 64.

Healthcare facilities throughout Maine have used a combination of the preceding measures to control the COVID-19 virus since the beginning of the pandemic; nonetheless, they have been the sites of numerous outbreaks of the virus. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 65. The number of outbreaks at designated healthcare facilities rose substantially from early August to early September 2021, notwithstanding the fact that the hospitals where the outbreaks occurred had strong infection control programs in place. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶¶ 46-47. Most of the healthcare facility outbreaks resulted from infected healthcare workers bringing COVID-19 into the facility. ECF No. 49-4 at ¶ 48.

B. The Plaintiffs’ Objection to the COVID-19 Vaccines

The Plaintiffs are nine individuals who are identified in the Complaint by pseudonyms. The Complaint alleges that Jane Does 1 through 5 and John Does 2 and 3 are healthcare workers employed by the Hospital Defendants. John Doe 1 is a licensed healthcare provider who operates his own practice. Jane Doe 6 is a healthcare worker employed by John Doe 1.6 ,7

The Plaintiffs object to receiving the COVID-19 vaccines based on their stated belief that "life is sacred from the moment of conception[.]" ECF No. 1 at ¶ 54. They contend that the development of the three COVID-19 vaccines employed or benefitted from the cell lines of aborted fetuses. Specifically, the Plaintiffs object to the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines because both are mRNA vaccines which, the Plaintiffs claim, "have their origins in research...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Together Emps. v. Mass Gen. Brigham Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • 10 Noviembre 2021
  • Bush v. Fantasia
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • 12 Septiembre 2022
    ... ... staff asked her to wear a face mask in accordance with the ... policy. [Compl. at 14]. The complaint does not allege any ... other instances in which any Plaintiff was ordered to comply ... with a mask mandate or denied access to a facility ... at issue in Roman, 141 S.Ct. at 66-67. See, ... e.g., Does 1-6 v. Mills, 16 F.4th 20, 31-32 (1st Cir ... 2021), ... cert. denied sub nom. Does 1-3 v. Mills, 142 S.Ct ... 1112 (2022) (distinguishing ... ...
  • Dr. T. v. Alexander-Scott
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Rhode Island
    • 7 Enero 2022
  • George v. Grossmont Cuyamaca Cmty. Coll. Dist. Bd. of Governors
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of California
    • 3 Noviembre 2022
    ... ... of its policy in May 2022. (Smith Decl. ¶ 5.) ...          In ... contrast to GCCCD and SDCCCD, SOCCCD does not disclose how ... its Accommodation Framework Operates. The SOCCCD Vaccine ... Requirement does not list any pertinent factors, nor ... members.'” (quoting Jacobson , 197 U.S. at ... 27) (alteration in original)); Does 1-6 v. Mills , ... 566 F.Supp.3d 34, 52 (D. Me. 2021) (finding vaccine mandate ... survived rational basis review because “unvaccinated ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT