Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21a244_hgci.pdf
Page Number: 19

Cite as:  595 U. S. ____ (2022) 

3 

BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., dissenting 

termined to be toxic or physically harmful or from new haz-
ards, and (B) that such emergency standard is necessary to 
protect employees from such danger.”  §655(c)(1).

Acting  under  that  statutory  command,  OSHA  promul-
gated  the  emergency  temporary  standard  at  issue  here.
The Standard obligates employers with at least 100 employ-
ees  to  require  that  an  employee  either  (1) be  vaccinated 
against COVID–19 or (2) take a weekly COVID–19 test and 
wear  a  mask  at  work.    86  Fed.  Reg.  61551–61553.    The 
Standard thus encourages vaccination, but permits employ-
ers to adopt a masking-or-testing policy instead.  (The ma-
jority obscures this choice by insistently calling the policy a 
“vaccine mandate.”  Ante, at 1, 4, 7, 8.)  Further, the Stand-
ard does not apply in a variety of settings.  It exempts em-
ployees who are at a reduced risk of infection because they 
work  from  home,  alone,  or  outdoors.  See  86  Fed.  Reg.
61551.  It makes exceptions based on religious objections or 
medical  necessity.  See  id.,  at  61552.  And  the  Standard 
does not constrain any employer able to show that its “con-
ditions,  practices,  means,  methods,  operations,  or  pro-
cesses” make its workplace equivalently “safe and health-
ful.” 
29  U. S. C.  §655(d).    Consistent  with  statutory
requirements,  the  Standard  lasts  only  six  months.  See 
§655(c)(3).

Multiple lawsuits challenging the Standard were filed in
the  Federal  Courts  of  Appeals.    The  applicants  asked  the
courts  to  stay  the  Standard’s  implementation  while  their
legal challenges were pending.  The lawsuits were consoli-
dated in the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.  See 28 
U. S. C. §2112(a)(3).  That court dissolved a stay previously 
entered,  thus  allowing  the  Standard  to  take  effect.  See 
In re MCP No. 165, 2021 WL 5989357, ___ F. 4th ___ (2021). 
The applicants now ask this Court to stay the Standard for
the duration of the litigation.  Today, the Court grants that
request, contravening clear legal principles and itself caus-
ing grave danger to the Nation’s workforce.