Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. For example, the Supreme Court did not give deference to the Food and Drug Administration's 1996 decision that it had implicit authority under its governing statutes to regulate tobacco. It appears to us not so much a new doctrine but a new label for courts' method of analyzing federal agencies' novel assertions of authority. The district court held that the Secretary's decision to enter the vaccine regulatory space for the first time implicates what some courts and commentators have called the "major questions doctrine," though apparently not (yet) so designated in a majority opinion for the Supreme Court. 2021), it appears that the Secretary will have the most difficulty overcoming the part of the ruling that applied the "major questions doctrine." We thus focus on that issue in assessing whether the Secretary has made a strong showing of likely success. Especially in light of a recent, precedential opinion from this court, see BST Holdings, L.L.C. The district court cited a number of reasons for enjoining the rule. Today's Fifth Circuit opinion, a per curiam for Judges Southwick, Graves, and Costa, upheld the district court's decision to issue a preliminary injunction, but concluded that there was no basis for a nationwide injunction. As I noted here, the court's rationale for ordering nationwide relief was quite thin and was not supported by the relevant Fifth Circuit precedent.
Several suits were filed against this rule, and one led a district court in Louisiana to impose a nationwide preliminary injunction against the rule. Becerra is an interim final rule promulgated by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) mandating that Medicare and Medicaid service providers require their workers to obtain COVID-19 vaccines. This seems like a reasonable decision.Īt issue in Louisiana v. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court injunction against the Biden Administration's COVID-19 vaccine mandate for health care workers, while narrowing the scope of the injunction to the plaintiff jurisdictions.