By DAVID DUPONT
BG Independent News
An Akron based Law firm has filed a suit in Wood County Common Pleas Court challenging BGSU’s vaccine mandate on behalf of three students and a faculty member.
The suit contends that the mandate violates state law, the Ohio Constitution and Ohio criminal statutes, said Warner Mendenhall, of Mendenhall Law Group. He noted that Tom Connors of the law firm is the lead attorney on the case.
The suit was filed on behalf of Andrea Hoerig, an assistant teaching professor in the College of Education and Human Development, and students Carolyn Dailey, Gabrielle Downard, and Amy Vorst.
Mendenhall described Hoerig and Dailey, who is also listed in the suit as a BGSU employee, as the lead plaintiffs.
The law firm has filed similar suits against the University of Cincinnati and Ohio University. Another suit against Miami University was dismissed when the university opted not to enforce the mandate for the plaintiffs. Despite the university having “backed down as to our complainants… we want a ruling to clarify this law,” Mendenhall said. Otherwise the university could simply take the same action at another time.
Mendenhall said the BGSU lawsuit is based on three claims.
First, the university’s mandate violates revised code. A recently enacted statute forbids requiring a vaccine that has not received full approval by the federal Food and Drug Administration.
So far only one vaccine a Pfizer BioNTech vaccine, which previously had received emergency use approval and which is now marketed as Comirnaty, has received full approval. Mendenhall contends that the vaccine, under the Comirnaty name, is not available in the state and that no employee or student in a public university has received it.
The suit also says the mandate violates revised code because the health order applies to those who have not been diagnosed with the virus nor have been exposed to it.
Second, the suit contends the mandate violates the rights granted in the Ohio Constitution for personal security, bodily integrity and autonomy by requiring individuals to get medical treatment in the form of both vaccination and masking.
Third, the mandate coerces the plaintiffs into acting against their will in a matter that they have freedom of choice.
Mendenhall maintains that the mandate is pointless because vaccinated individuals continue to contract the omicron variant of COVID-19. “This latest variant is hitting vaxxed people as hard as it’s hitting the unvaxxed and naturally immune.”
And given the mild cases among young adults, he said, he sees little reason for them to be vaccinated.
Health officials, however, say that unvaccinated individuals are much more likely to suffered more severe cases and are far more likely to be hospitalized.
[RELATED: Rapid home tests for COVID flew off the shelves this Christmas]
Through university spokesperson Alex Solis, BGSU issued the following statement: “As the University has done since the onset of this global pandemic, we continue to implement public health measures to manage COVID-19. Recognizing the effectiveness of vaccines, BGSU offered a balanced vaccination and exemption program for all students, faculty and staff. The University’s goal remains doing its part to ensure the health and safety of our community, and BGSU has no further comment regarding this litigation at this time.”
While students, faculty and staff can apply for an exemption from the mandate that exemption carries additional requirements in terms of masking, quarantine, and testing. That amounts to discrimination, Mendenhall said.
