104 F.4th 715
9th Cir.2024Background
- LAUSD implemented and at times rescinded a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for employees, at several points allowing or removing a testing alternative.
- Plaintiffs, both organizations and individuals, challenged the vaccine mandate under the Fourteenth Amendment, alleging their right to refuse unwanted medical treatment was infringed.
- LAUSD initially responded to litigation by offering a testing alternative but reinstituted the mandate after the first lawsuit was dismissed for lack of ripeness.
- After oral argument in the Ninth Circuit on appeal, and amidst public scrutiny, LAUSD rescinded the mandate and moved to dismiss the appeal as moot.
- The district court had dismissed the suit, relying primarily on Jacobson v. Massachusetts, applying rational basis review and finding no fundamental right implicated.
- On appeal, the majority held the case was not moot under the voluntary cessation doctrine and found the district court misapplied Jacobson, vacating and remanding for further proceedings under the correct legal standard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mootness/Voluntary Cessation | LAUSD rescinded the policy only due to litigation risk; not moot | Rescission was a genuine policy change; case is now moot | Not moot: Rescission appeared litigation-motivated; could recur |
| Fundamental Right to Refuse Medical Treatment | COVID vaccine mandate violates right to refuse medical treatment | The mandate does not implicate a fundamental right | Dismissal improper: Plaintiffs allege a plausibly fundamental right |
| Applicability of Jacobson v. Massachusetts | Jacobson applies only if a vaccine prevents disease spread | Jacobson permits rational basis review of vaccine mandate | Jacobson inapplicable: Allegations distinguish from Jacobson scenario |
| Standard of Review for Mandate | Strict scrutiny should apply given liberty interest | Rational basis applies (public health rationale) | Rational basis not automatically proper; remand for correct standard |
Key Cases Cited
- Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (vaccination mandates justified by preventing spread of contagious diseases)
- Cruzan ex rel. Cruzan v. Director, Mo. Dep’t of Health, 497 U.S. 261 (recognizing constitutionally protected right to refuse medical treatment)
- Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (fundamental rights derived from tradition/history; includes right to refuse medical treatment)
- Lane v. Franks, 573 U.S. 228 (public employers cannot condition employment on relinquishing constitutional rights)
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Env’t Servs. (TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (voluntary cessation exception to mootness)
- Los Angeles County v. Davis, 440 U.S. 625 (standards for mootness in government actions)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (standard for motion to dismiss—plausibility and acceptance of pleaded facts as true)
- Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (fundamental liberty interests and medical autonomy)