This case challenges Santa Clara County’s discriminatory vaccine mandate and arbitrary risk tier system that classifies employees as low, medium or high risk.
This case challenges Santa Clara County’s discriminatory vaccine mandate and arbitrary risk tier system that classifies employees as low, medium or high risk. The Plaintiffs were relegated to unpaid leave because they would not take a religiously objectionable vaccine and because they were classified as high risk. The county prioritizes employees with medical exemptions and assists them with finding a position. Many Plaintiffs have been trying to locate a job at the county for months. Plaintiffs raise First and Fourteenth Amendment claims and a claim under the Fair Employment and Housing Act.
Press Release | Santa Clara County Judge Certifies COVID-19 Vaccine Lawsuit As A Class Action
Advocates for Faith & Freedom
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Tuesday, January 30, 2024
Contact: Jake Matthews
jake@jlkpolitical.com
The Class Action Allows Hundreds of Employees the Opportunity to Prove Their Damages
Murrieta, CA – Monday evening, January 29, 2024, Federal Judge Beth Labson Freeman of the Northern District of California certified a vaccine-related lawsuit as a class action for liability purposes, allowing hundreds of employees in Santa Clara County who were placed on unpaid leave for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine to prove their damages.
This case challenges the County’s discriminatory COVID-19 vaccine orders and practices, which relegated employees to unpaid leave, even if they had a religious exemption. The January 29 order allows the Plaintiffs to proceed to trial on behalf of a class of hundreds of employees in the County who declined to take the vaccine due to their religious convictions.
Specifically, the Court certified the following class:
All individuals who: 1) work or worked for the County and/or [] were subject to its vaccine policies and orders, including the Risk Tier System; 2) were forced by the County to choose between taking the vaccine to maintain their jobs and/or their employment-related benefits or being placed on unpaid leave; 3) were [] classified as working in high-risk jobs pursuant to the County’s Risk Tier System; and 4) received [] a religious exemption from the County (the “Class”) between August 5, 2021 and September 27, 2022 (the “Class Period”).
“We are confident that we will prevail because the County’s vaccine policies and practices were arbitrary and capricious and discriminated against religious employees,” says Mariah Gondeiro, an attorney for Advocates for Faith & Freedom. Advocates has been appointed as Co-Class Counsel along with Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP.
“The County owes these courageous county employees, who worked faithfully throughout the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, lost wages and benefits,” says Bethany Onishenko, also an attorney with Advocates for Faith & Freedom.
###
Press Release
Advocates for Faith & Freedom
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: friday, july 1, 2022
Contact: mariah gondeiro at 951-304-7583 or
mgondeiro@faith-freedom.com
For Immediate Release 07/01/2022, Murrieta, California – Thursday evening, June 30, 2022, Federal Judge Beth Labson Freeman of the Northern District of California enjoined Santa Clara County’s vaccine policy – a first in California.
The county’s COVID-19 vaccine policy gave accommodations to employees with medical exemptions in the form of transfers and reassignments while placing employees who sought religious exemptions on unpaid leave.
Judge Freeman wrote:
The County admits that in assisting exempt employees in high-risk roles with transfers to available County positions in other risk tiers, the County gives “those with disability or medical contraindication vaccine exemptions . . . ‘preferential consideration’ pursuant to California State Disability Regulations and the Americans with Disabilities Act.” Marquez Decl. ¶ 41. The Court finds that this portion of the Accommodations framework likely “operate[s] in practice” in way that “target[s] religious practices” by placing those with religious exemptions at a disadvantage behind those with secular exemptions (medical and disability). Stormans, 794 F.3d at 1076 (quoting Lukumi, 508 U.S. at 535–37). Thus, Plaintiffs have shown that they are likely to succeed in proving that this portion of the Accommodations framework is not operationally neutral.
“Santa Clara County’s trend of acting discriminatory towards people of faith in relation to COVID-19 received another rebuke from a federal court,” says Robert Tyler, President of Advocates for Faith & Freedom. “Discrimination against Christians and other people of faith will not be tolerated.”
“We will not stop fighting for the courageous employees of Santa Clara County until they have been fully repaid their lost wages and benefits, which were stripped away because of their religious beliefs” says Mariah Gondeiro, an attorney for Advocates for Faith & Freedom.
###
Press Release
Advocates for Faith & Freedom
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, March 3, 2022
Contact: mariah gondeiro at 951-304-7583 or
mgondeiro@faith-freedom.com
For Immediate Release 03/03/2022, Los Angeles, California – Today, Unify Santa Clara County (“UnifySCC”) filed an application for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction pending the disposition of their lawsuit filed against Santa Clara County, Sara H. Cody, and James Williams. The Plaintiffs request the Court immediately restore their jobs.
UnifySCC is an association that consists of members whose sincerely held religious beliefs prevent them from taking the COVID-19 vaccine or booster. Santa Clara County has relegated them to unpaid leave, depriving them of their livelihood, because they are “high” risk employees, as determined by the county’s arbitrary risk tier system. The Defendants did not engage in negotiations to determine if reasonable accommodations were available to the members of UnifySCC. However, Santa Clara County does provide reasonable accommodations to employees for medical reasons, as illustrated in emails UnifySCC relies on in its lawsuit.
“Santa Clara County’s vaccination policies are a blatant violation of the First Amendment,” says Mariah Gondeiro, an attorney for Advocates for Faith and Freedom. “The county has no compelling reason to treat similarly situated individuals differently based on religion.”
Furthermore, Santa Clara County’s vaccination policies are irrational, arbitrary, and counterproductive to community health. As stated by Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya, the expert for UnifySCC, the county’s policies are irrational because “[t]he individuals placed in high risk are more likely to have contracted COVID-19 in the past and therefore have immune protection. It is counterproductive to public health to strip these employees of their employment when the public relies greatly on their services.”
In addition to immediate injunctive relief, UnifySCC is also seeking compensatory damages against Santa Clara County, including, at a minimum, lost wages.
###
Tom Davis, Plaintiff in lawsuit against Santa Clara County
For additional comments and interviews, please email Jake Matthews at Jake@jlkpolitical.com.
About Advocates for Faith & Freedom (www.faith-freedom.com): Advocates for Faith & Freedom is a non-profit law firm dedicated to protecting constitutional and religious liberty in the courts. Our mission is to engage in cases that will uphold our religious liberty and America’s heritage and to educate Americans about our fundamental constitutional rights.
Email info@faith-freedom.com to receive press releases. Also, join us on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter to stay up-to-date on our progress in this case and others.