Judge Throws Out Lawsuit Over Houston Medical’s Mandated COVID Vaccinations for Employees

The judge found a claim made by the lead plaintiff that likened the vaccine to the Nazis’ forced medical experiments on World War II Holocaust victims to be “reprehensible.”

Judge Throws Out Lawsuit Over Houston Medical’s Mandated COVID Vaccinations for Employees

UPDATE JUNE 14, 2021: Houston Methodist employees who sued the hospital for requiring them to receive COVID-19 vaccinations had their lawsuit thrown out by  a federal judge on Saturday.

U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes said the claim that the vaccines are “experimental and dangerous” are false and irrelevant, reports the Associated Press. The judge also found another claim made by the lead plaintiff that likened the vaccine to the Nazis’ forced medical experiments on World War II Holocaust victims to be “reprehensible.”

Additionally, AP reports Hughes did not find mandated vaccinations to be coercion.

The plaintiffs said they would appeal the ruling.

UPDATE JUNE 9, 2021:

In response to Houston Methodist’s mandate that all of their employees receive the COVID-19 vaccine, 178 staff members have been suspended by the healthcare facility for refusing to comply. They could be terminated.

The deadline for employees to be vaccinated was Monday, reports the Houston Press, and some employees walked out in protest of the mandate. They were joined by anti-vaccine well-wisher from the community.

Although 178 of Houston Methodist’s employees have been suspended, that number represents less than 1% of the healthcare facility’s workforce of nearly 25,000 employee, Houston Methodist CEO Dr. Marc Boom told USA Today.

“We are nearly 100% compliant with our COVID-19 vaccine mandate,” Boom said in an email to employees on Tuesday. “Houston Methodist is officially the first hospital system in the country to achieve this goal for the benefit of its patients.”

Axios reports that 285 other employees received a medical or religious exemption, while another 332 were granted deferrals for pregnancy or other reasons.


While only 9% of more than 700 employers surveyed earlier this year by law firm Fisher Phillips said they would require employees to be vaccinated for COVID-19, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) said on May 28 that employers have the right to mandate it, as long as they comply with the reasonable accommodation provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act and other laws.

Accommodations may include allowing an unvaccinated employee to wear a mask and social distance while at work, to work a modified shift, get periodic tests for COVID-19 or be given the opportunity to telework, reports Reuters.

More than 117 employees at Houston Methodist hospital, however, believe such a mandate violates the Nuremberg Code, a medical ethics code that prohibits forced medical experiments and requires voluntary consent. The hospital employees have consequently filed a lawsuit, stating that the vaccines are awaiting full FDA approval and licensing, which could take months, reports ABC News.

Both the hospital and the EEOC mandate say employees can be suspended and terminated from their jobs if they refuse the vaccine. Further, the EEOC mandate states that employers may offer incentives, as long as they are not coercive.

In the filing of joint lawsuit, the 117 hospital employees allege the hospital is “illegally requiring its employees to be injected with an experimental vaccine as a condition of employment.”

Hospital CEO Dr. Marc Boom sent a litter in April to all employees announcing that all employees needed to be vaccinated by June 7.

“Please see the HR policy that outlines the consequences of not being compliant by June 7, which include suspension and eventually termination,” the letter stated.

Attorney Jared Woodfill, who filed the lawsuit, countered by saying that Houston Methodist is requiring vaccines for profit, and that “employees are being forced to serve as human guinea pigs.” He added, “It is a severe and blatant violation of the Nuremberg Code and the public policy in the state of Texas.”

If you appreciated this article and want to receive more valuable industry content like this, click here to sign up for our FREE digital newsletters!

Leading in Turbulent Times: Effective Campus Public Safety Leadership for the 21st Century

This new webcast will discuss how campus public safety leaders can effectively incorporate Clery Act, Title IX, customer service, “helicopter” parents, emergency notification, town-gown relationships, brand management, Greek Life, student recruitment, faculty, and more into their roles and develop the necessary skills to successfully lead their departments. Register today to attend this free webcast!

One response to “Judge Throws Out Lawsuit Over Houston Medical’s Mandated COVID Vaccinations for Employees”

  1. Dave Weisman says:

    Nobody — nobody — has the Right to place another’s life at risk. How one feels about coronavirus is totally unimportant. Only one fact counts: What the coronavirus scientifically/medically is. This virus cares not in the slightest about any individual’s, or any group’s, or any politician’s feelings. It will harm, kill, and mutate deadlier where and when it can.

    If coronavirus’ risk was to oneself alone, then one’s choice to fight or not fight it would be to oneself alone. However, since its risk is to many unknowingly being able to pass its risk onto others, fighting it requires scientists first learn what is required to defeat it.

    Fighting this deadly coronavirus is a challenge for science, not law, like such challenges have always been. Unlike, for example, the Flu, where a permanent solution is still unknown, scientists have identified how to win against this virus. The question then becomes: Do you want your officials to guard winning, or support continued losing? Scientists have proven that winning against this virus means getting vaccinated and wearing a mask—a mask worn with understanding: I wear a mask to protect you, from me; you wear a mask to protect me, from you. The primary purpose of a mask is not to prevent the virus getting in from others to you, but to prevent the virus from getting out from you to others. With this scientifically valid vaccination and mask solution, what to legally do is no more a personal choice than deciding what maximum speed is safe to drive in a residential area is a personal choice. Claiming proven science is not valid makes no more sense than claiming the earth is flat. To this virus such claims are food for its continued “success.”

Leave a Reply

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

Get Our Newsletters
Campus Safety Conference promo