The Supreme Court declined to hear a case challenging New York's COVID vaccine mandate for health care workers on the grounds of religious liberty. But Clarence Thomas's dissenting opinion is making headlines. The high court justice wrote that the health care workers who brought the case "object on religious grounds to all available COVID-19 vaccines because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children." While cells obtained from decades-old elective abortions were indeed used during the testing phase of the vaccine development process for COVID, other vaccines (including rubella and chickenpox) used those cells for testing as well, Politico reports. No COVID vaccines used in the US contain any fetal cells, Axios reports.
Some point out that Thomas may not have been agreeing with the claim himself, but rather simply citing what the health care workers believe. His dissenting opinion was that the high court should have considered the question. Instead, however, the court let stand a lower court ruling that allowed the mandate to stand. The mandate does not allow for any religious exemptions, but does have a narrow allowance for medical exemptions for those who are highly allergic to the COVID vaccine. Thomas wondered whether the mandate could be applicable when it allows for secular, but not religious, exemptions. "Because I would address this issue now in the ordinary course, before the next crisis forces us again to decide complex legal issues in an emergency posture, I respectfully dissent," he wrote. (More Clarence Thomas stories.)
,
uBlock 
,
and
Ghostery 
)
