Santa Clara County employees win legal battle over COVID-19

Audio By Carbonatix

(The Center Square) - Another group has won a long-fought battle over COVID-19 lockdown policies in California. 

After more than four years of litigation, Advocates for Faith & Freedom, together with Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP, secured a settlement for Santa Clara County employees who challenged the county’s vaccine mandate and worker restrictions policies. The county is in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Under Gov. Gavin Newsom, California experienced some of the strictest COVID-era restrictions in the country, including restrictions against people of faith. The policies resulted in multiple lawsuits that the Democratic governor lost, including at the U.S. Supreme Court, The Center Square reported. The state and county governments ultimately agreed to multiple multi-million-dollar settlements with churches and pastors who faced jail time for refusing to comply with COVID-era lockdown policies, The Center Square reported. 

In this case, Santa Clara County employees were able to receive COVID-19 vaccine mandate exemptions based on their sincerely held religious beliefs but were then prevented from working and stripped of their salaries, according to the litigation. At the time, in 2022, the county imposed a system classifying employees as low, medium or high risk. The risk-tiered system categorized employees including according to their vaccine mandate exemptions. Those who received medical exemptions were transferred or reassigned. Those who obtained religious exemptions were put on unpaid leave. 

In response, a group of county employees formed an association, UnifySCC, arguing their sincerely held religious beliefs prevented them from taking the COVID-19 vaccine or booster. Their mission was to advocate for and protect medical and religious freedom for all county employees.

In 2022, hundreds of county employees and UnifySCC members who received religious exemptions were classified as high risk and put on unpaid leave. Prior to being put on leave, county officials wouldn’t engage in negotiations with them to determine if reasonable accommodations were available to them to allow them to keep working, according to court documents. At the same time, county officials provided reasonable accommodations to employees who received medical exemptions, according to the documents.

Initially dozens of employees who received religious exemptions sued, arguing the county’s policies violated the First and 14th Amendments and the Fair Employment and Housing Act. They also challenged the county’s refusal to provide reasonable accommodations that would have enabled them to keep working while also adhering to their religious convictions.

In January 2024, a federal judge approved their claims in a class action lawsuit.

Nearly three years later, the county settled. 

“This was a long and difficult fight, and our clients remained steadfast throughout it,” Advocates for Faith & Freedom Senior Legal Counsel Sam Kane said in an emailed statement. “They should never have been forced to choose between their sincerely held religious beliefs and their livelihoods. We are grateful to have reached a favorable resolution that recognizes what they endured and brings this years-long litigation to a close.”

Throughout the case, Advocates and Wolf Haldenstein challenged the county’s accommodation policies, arguing they violated federal law. The litigation spanned nearly five years involving extensive discovery, class proceedings, dispositive motions, and preparation for trial. The parties settled before reaching a trial.

“Our clients showed tremendous resolve in pursuing this case,” Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP attorney Rachele Byrd said. “They stood by their convictions through years of complex litigation, and we are pleased to have secured a favorable settlement that provides meaningful relief and allows them to finally move forward.”

The attorneys said the lawsuit was another reminder that “religious liberty protections matter most when exercising one’s faith comes at a real personal or professional cost.”

“Religious freedom cannot exist only when it is convenient,” Kane added. “When government policies place people in the position of choosing between their faith and their careers, those rights must be defended. We were honored to stand alongside these employees.”