Connect with us

Local News

Despite all their efforts to block the vaccine requirement, IU students will have to get vaxxed if they want to continue with the studies

Published

on

Bloomington, Indiana – Indiana University students in multiple occasions tried to block the IU plan for vaccine requirement, but the latest refusal from the Supreme Court Justice ended all their dreams up.

As we already reported, a group of IU students sent an emergency request to the Supreme Court Justice to block the IU plan regarding the vaccine requirement for students, faculty and staff. However, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett has refused to block a plan by Indiana University to require students and employees to get vaccinated against COVID-19.

This seems to be student’s last instance they could go.

This was the first time the high court has weighed in on a vaccine mandate.

Before reaching the supreme court, last month the same group of students tried to block the plan with filing appeal to the federal appeals court, but the court then decided the university can proceed with their initial plans and require everyone to be vaccinated if they want to go to college.

When the plan was initially announced several weeks ago, university’s officials said there will be religious and medical exemptions, but those students will have to be tested once a week and wear masks during their stay in the college.

James Bopp, the attorney representing the IU students, released the following statement Thursday:

“We are disappointed that Justice Barrett refused to intervene and protect IU student’s rights.

At least pending our appeal, IU can continue to give IU students only those few rights that are afforded to convicted felons incarcerated in prison, which is what the courts have so far empowered IU to do and which is the plenary power over students that IU claims.

But IU students are adults entitled to make medical treatment decisions for themselves, unless IU can prove in court that their COVID vaccine mandate is justified, which they have not done and that the courts have not required them to do.

Our appeal of the denial of the preliminary injunction is not effected by this ruling on the request for an emergency injunction and will continue.

The fight is not over for a long shot.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Advertisement

Trending