Health Law Daily Wrap Up, HEALTH CARE EMPLOYMENT ISSUES—N.D. Ill.: Court holds Illinois right of conscience act bars COVID-19 vaccine religious exemption cases, (Sep 20, 2024)

By Justin Marcus Smith, J.D.

The court cited existing state appellate court opinions that already ruled a section of the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act was a declaration of existing law.

An employee of a health care facility did not have standing to pursue a claim that the facility violated the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act (IHCRCA) when it denied the employee a COVID-19 vaccine religious belief exemption, held the federal district court in Chicago. The court found that three Illinois intermediate appellate courts had already clarified that IHCRCA Section 13.5 is a declaration of existing law and consequently bars IHCRCA claims based on COVID-19 preventive measures. The court granted the employer’s motion to dismiss the employee’s IHCRCA count for failure to state a claim. The court declined to consider the employee’s constitutional challenge to the IHCRCA because it held the employee did not have standing per the statute. The employer did not challenge the employee’s federal civil rights claims at this juncture (Locke v. Chicago Family Health Center, No. 1:23-cv-04650 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 16, 2024)).

Background. Per the allegations of the complaint, a former care director (employee) at a Chicago health center requested a religious exemption to her employer’s COVID-19 vaccination requirement. The employee claimed a sincerely held belief that receiving the COVID-19 vaccine would violate her religion. The employer initially approved a religious exemption, but it later changed course and denied exemption.

The employee filed an Equal Opportunity Commission (EEOC) complaint. The EEOC issued a Notice of Right to Sue. The employee then filed the instant lawsuit in July 2023. The employee alleged that the employer’s denial of a religious exemption from vaccination violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act (IRCA).

The employer moved to dismiss the employee’s IHCRCA count under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. The employer argued for dismissal of the IHCRCA count on the basis that IHCRCA did not apply to COVID-19 mitigation measures. The court noted, apparently in the context of a prior amendment of the IHCRCA, that IHCRCA expressly provided that employer measures or requirements “intended to prevent contraction or transmission of COVID-19” would not violate the IHCRCA. Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 70/13.5. Section 13.5. That section continued that it was a “declaration of existing law and shall not be construed as a new enactment.” Id.

The employee contended that Section 13.5 violated the First Amendment of the federal Constitution, but she did not argue that it was merely a declaration of existing law, which, in the court’s words, “did not change anything about the IHCRCA.” The court reasoned that the employee would not have standing to challenge Section 13.5 if it merely clarified but did not change the IHCRCA.

To determine the effect of Section 13.5, the court said it must ascertain how the Supreme Court of Illinois would rule on the issue. If there were no state Supreme Court ruling, the court would have to give great weight to the holdings of the state’s intermediate appellate courts.

The court found that three Illinois intermediate appellate courts had already held that Section 13.5 is a declaration of existing law and bars IHCRCA claims based on COVID-19 preventive measures. The court said it was not aware of any “data” or other reason to conclude the Illinois Supreme Court would arrive at a different conclusion. The court accordingly held that Section 13.5 was a declaration of existing law and barred the employee’s IHCRCA claim.

The court declined to address the employee’s constitutional challenge to Section 13.5 because it held the employee did not have standing to do so.

The case is No. 1:23-cv-04650.

Judge: Rowland, M.

Attorneys: Jason R. Craddock, Sr. (Law Office of Jason R. Craddock) for Crystal Locke. Antonio Caldarone (Laner Muchin, Ltd.) for Chicago Family Health Center.

Companies: Chicago Family Health Center

Cases: CaseDecisions Covid19 GCNNews EmploymentNews IllinoisNews