Is it too much to ask a reporter to actually read the judge's decision? Apparently so.
It is the hospital, not the judge, that is telling the workers to get vaccinated or get fired. The judge simply ruled on the plaintiff's claims that if they were fired for refusing to get vaccinated, the hospital's action would amount to unlawful termination under Texas law. But Texas law only protects employees from being terminated for refusing to
commit an act carrying criminal penalties to the worker, and receiving a COVID vaccine isn't an illegal act.
The plaintiffs argued in the alternative that forcing them to be vaccinated violated public policy, but the judge pointed out that (a) Texas law doesn't recognize such an exception to at-will employment, and (b) even if it did, under relevant Supreme Court precedent compulsory vaccination doesn't violate due process.
Plaintiff's additional argument that the hospital's vaccination requirement violated federal law and the Nuremberg Code failed because (a) the federal law the Plaintiffs relied on and the Nuremberg Code apply only to the government, not to a private employer; and (b) comparing the hospital's vaccination requirement to the medical-experiment atrocities committed by the Nazis that the Nuremberg Code addressed is, in the court's words, "reprehensible". Even Ron Paul didn't buy that comparison.
https://int.********/data/documentto...6cea5/full.pdf
Judge Hughes, who authored the opinion, was appointed to the bench by President Reagan.
Connect With Us