Case Law Georgia v. President of the U.S.

Georgia v. President of the U.S.

Document Cited Authorities (105) Cited in (10) Related (1)

Harold D. Melton, Charles E. Peeler, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP, Atlanta, GA, Misha Tseytlin, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP, Chicago, IL, Paul H. Dunbar, III, Capers Dunbar Sanders Bruckner & Bellotti, LLP, Augusta, GA, Stephen John Petrany, Drew Waldbeser, Attorney General's Office, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiffs-Appellees State of Georgia, Governor of the State of Georgia, Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, and Commissioner of the Georgia Department of Agriculture.

Edmund Gerard LaCour, Jr., Thomas Alexander Wilson, Alabama Attorney General's Office, Montgomery, AL, Paul H. Dunbar, III, Capers Dunbar Sanders Bruckner & Bellotti, LLP, Augusta, GA, Charles E. Peeler, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiffs-Appellees State of Alabama, Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries, Alabama Department of Public Health, and Alabama Department of Rehabilitation Services.

Paul H. Dunbar, III, Capers Dunbar Sanders Bruckner & Bellotti, LLP, Augusta, GA, Brian Patrick Kane, Dayton P. Reed, William Scott Zanzig, Idaho Office of the Attorney General, Civil Litigation Division, Boise, ID, Charles E. Peeler, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee State of Idaho.

Paul H. Dunbar, III, Capers Dunbar Sanders Bruckner & Bellotti, LLP, Augusta, GA, Brant M. Laue, Solicitor General of Kansas, Topeka, KS, Charles E. Peeler, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee State of Kansas.

James Emory Smith, Jr., Attorney General's Office, Columbia, SC, Paul H. Dunbar, III, Capers Dunbar Sanders Bruckner & Bellotti, LLP, Augusta, GA, Thomas T. Hydrick, Attorney General's Office, Columbia, SC, Charles E. Peeler, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee State of South Carolina.

Paul H. Dunbar, III, Capers Dunbar Sanders Bruckner & Bellotti, LLP, Augusta, GA, Melissa Holyoak, Office of the Attorney General, State of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, Charles E. Peeler, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee State of Utah.

Paul H. Dunbar, III, Capers Dunbar Sanders Bruckner & Bellotti, LLP, Augusta, GA, Charles E. Peeler, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP, Atlanta, GA, Lindsay S. See, Attorney General's Office, Charleston, WV, for Plaintiff-Appellee State of West Virginia.

Edmund Gerard LaCour, Jr., Thomas Alexander Wilson, Alabama Attorney General's Office, Montgomery, AL, Paul H. Dunbar, III, Capers Dunbar Sanders Bruckner & Bellotti, LLP, Augusta, GA, William Glenn Parker, Jr., General Counsel, Office of the Governor, Montgomery, AL, Charles E. Peeler, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee Governor of the State of Alabama.

Paul H. Dunbar, III, Capers Dunbar Sanders Bruckner & Bellotti, LLP, Augusta, GA, Charles E. Peeler, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP, Atlanta, GA, Dayton P. Reed, William Scott Zanzig, Idaho Office of the Attorney General, Civil Litigation Division, Boise, ID, for Plaintiffs-Appellees Governor of the State of Idaho, and Idaho State Board of Education.

William Grayson Lambert, Office of the Governor, State of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, Paul H. Dunbar, III, Capers Dunbar Sanders Bruckner & Bellotti, LLP, Augusta, GA, Thomas Ashley Limehouse, Jr., Office of the Governor, State of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, Charles E. Peeler, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee Governor of the State of South Carolina.

Kathleen J. Jennings, James Larry Stine, Wimberly Lawson Steckel Schneider & Stine, PC, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc.

Anna O. Mohan, Joshua Revesz, David Peters, Daniel Winik, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Appellate Staff, Washington, DC, Vinita Andrapalliyal, U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch, Washington, DC, Matthew Allan Josephson, Bradford Collins Patrick, U.S. Attorney Service - Southern District of Georgia, U.S. Attorney's Office, Savannah, GA, for Defendants-Appellants President of the United States, Safer Federal Workforce Task Force, United States Office of Personnel Management, Director, Office of Personnel Management and Co-Chair Safer Federal Workforce Task Force, Office of Management and Budget, Acting Director, Office of Management and Budget and Member of the Safer Federal Workforce Task Force, General Services Administration, Administrator, General Services Administration and Co-Chair of Safer Federal Workforce Task Force, Co-Chair of Safer Federal Workforce Task Force and Covid-19 Response Coordinator, Director, Federal Protective Service, Director, United States Secret Service, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Director, Center for Disease Control, U.S. Department of Defense, Secretary, Department of Defense, Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, Director, National Institute of Health, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, National Science Foundation, Director, National Science Foundation, U.S. Department of Commerce, Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Director, Department of Transportation, U.S. Department of Energy, and Secretary, U.S. Department of Energy.

Anna O. Mohan, Joshua Revesz, Daniel Winik, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Appellate Staff, Washington, DC, Vinita Andrapalliyal, U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch, Washington, DC, Matthew Allan Josephson, Bradford Collins Patrick, U.S. Attorney Service - Southern District of Georgia, U.S. Attorney's Office, Savannah, GA, for Defendant-Appellant Secretary, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Michael A. Caplan, Caplan Cobb, LLC, Atlanta, GA, Jeffrey B. Dubner, Rachel L. Fried, JoAnn Kintz, Jessica Morton, Democracy Forward Foundation, Washington, DC, for Amici Curiae American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Chest Physicians, American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, American College of Physicians, American Geriatrics Society, American Lung Association, American Medical Association, American Medical Women's Association, American Psychiatric Association, American Society for Clinical Pathology, American Society of Hematology, American Thoracis Society, and Society of Interventional Radiology.

Natalie Christmas, Office of the Attorney General, Tallahassee, FL, for Amici Curiae State of Florida, State of Alaska, State of Arkansas, State of Arizona, State of Indiana, State of Iowa, State of Kentucky, State of Louisiana, State of Mississippi, the State of Missouri, State of Montana, State of Nebraska, State of New Hampshire, State of Ohio, State of Oklahoma, State of South Dakota, State of Tennessee, and State of Texas.

Scott A. Keller, Lehotsky Keller, LLP, Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America.

Before Grant, Anderson, and Edmondson, Circuit Judges.

Opinion of the Court

Grant, Circuit Judge:

Executive Order 14042 directs executive agencies to include a clause in procurement agreements requiring federal contractors to comply with workplace safety rules designed to respond to the Covid-19 pandemic. We consider one of those requirements here: a mandate that employees who work on or in connection with a covered contract, or share a workplace with another employee who does, be fully vaccinated against Covid-19.

In this lawsuit—one of many brought across the country to challenge the contractor vaccine mandate—the district court entered a nationwide preliminary injunction after concluding that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail on their assertion that the mandate was outside the scope of the Procurement Act. The court ordered the federal government not to enforce the mandate in any covered agreement. We agree that the plaintiffs’ challenge to the mandate will likely succeed and that they are entitled to preliminary relief. Even so, because the injunction's nationwide scope is too broad, we vacate it in part.

I.
A.

When Congress passed the Procurement Act (also called the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act) in 1949, it prefaced the new statute with a declaration of policy: "It is the intent of the Congress in enacting this legislation to provide for the Government an economical and efficient system" for "the procurement and supply of personal property and nonpersonal services." Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, Pub. L. No. 81-152, § 2, 63 Stat. 377, 378. That purpose statement, with modernized language, is now found in § 101 of Title 40. See 40 U.S.C. § 101 ("The purpose of this subtitle is to provide the Federal Government with an economical and efficient system" for activities including "[p]rocuring and supplying property and nonpersonal services, and performing related functions.").

In line with that purpose, the Procurement Act constructed an administrative apparatus for the federal government's procurement system. At the head of that system is the President. The Act authorizes the President, in the key provision here, to "prescribe policies and directives that the President considers necessary to...

5 cases
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit – 2022
Louisiana v. Biden
"... ... Joseph R. BIDEN, Jr., in his official capacity as President of the United States; United States of America; Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council; General ... Curiae State of Florida, State of Alaska, State of Arizona, State of Arkansas, State of Georgia, State of Idaho, State of Iowa, State of Kansas, State of Kentucky, State of Missouri, State of ... Instead, the Government would have us say that as this is an exercise of the President's "proprietary authority, as purchaser of ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Ohio – 2022
GBX Assocs. v. United States
"... ... not solely as to an individual party. See, e.g., ... Pennsylvania v. President United States , 930 F.3d 543, ... 575 (3d Cir. 2019) (“[O]ur APA case law suggests that, ... “Use of the ‘setting aside' language [in ... § 706(2)] does not seem to tell us one way or another ... whether to nullify illegal administrative action or not to ... 19 F.4th 890 (6th Cir. 2021) ( en banc ). See also ... Georgia v. President of the United States, 46 F.4th ... 1283, 1304 (11th Cir. 2022) (“By design, ... "
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit – 2023
Commonwealth v. Biden
"... ... Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Joseph R. BIDEN, in his official capacity as President of the United States of America, et al., Defendants-Appellants. No. 21-6147 United States Court of ... , 23 F.4th at 604 (criticizing the government's "heavy reliance" on the purpose statement); Georgia v. President of the United States , 46 F.4th 1283, 1298 (11th Cir. 2022) (opinion of Grant, J.) ... The text of § 121(a) itself tells us as much. The phrase "carry out" requires a task to be done—something "to put into practice or ... "
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit – 2022
Sailboat Bend Sober Living, LLC v. City of Fort Lauderdale
"... ... Nor does our case law compel us to reach a second, justification stage in the analysis when a plaintiff fails to make a prima ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Arizona – 2023
Arizona v. Walsh
"... ... of Labor (“DOL”), the DOL Wage & Hour ... Division, President Joseph R. Biden, and Acting Administrator ... of the DOL Wage & Hour Division Jessica Looman ... ( Id .) See Bradley v. T-Mobile US", Inc ., No ... 17-CV-07232-BLF, 2020 WL 1233924, at *7 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 13, ... 2020) (\xE2" ... v ... Sec'y of Labor , 442 F.2d 159, 170-71 (3d Cir. 1971); ... but see Georgia v. Biden , 46 F.4th 1283, 1293-1301 ... (11th Cir. 2022) (op. of Grant, J.) (adopting a ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial
1 books and journal articles
Document | Vol. 88 Núm. 2, March 2023 – 2023
Purposivism for Me, Textualism for Thee: West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency.
"...2599-602. (11) Id. at 2599. (12) Id. at 2614. (13) Id. at 2614-16. (14) Id. at 2615-16. (15) Georgia v. President of the United States, 46 F.4th 1283, 1295-97 (11th Cir. 2022) (enjoining the contractor vaccine mandate; Louisiana v. Biden, 55 F.4th 1017, 1019 (5th Cir. 2022) (16) Brown v. U...."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial
1 firm's commentaries
Document | Mondaq United States – 2024
Corporate Transparency Act Declared Unconstitutional By Alabama Federal Court ' What Does This Mean For Your Company?
"...judicial district, the same judicial district, or even upon the same judge in a different case."); Georgia v. Pres. of the U.S., 46 F.4th 1283, 1304 (11th Cir. 2022) ("The decision of any one of [the federal district or circuit courts] typically has little effect on the other courts of its ..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
1 books and journal articles
Document | Vol. 88 Núm. 2, March 2023 – 2023
Purposivism for Me, Textualism for Thee: West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency.
"...2599-602. (11) Id. at 2599. (12) Id. at 2614. (13) Id. at 2614-16. (14) Id. at 2615-16. (15) Georgia v. President of the United States, 46 F.4th 1283, 1295-97 (11th Cir. 2022) (enjoining the contractor vaccine mandate; Louisiana v. Biden, 55 F.4th 1017, 1019 (5th Cir. 2022) (16) Brown v. U...."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit – 2022
Louisiana v. Biden
"... ... Joseph R. BIDEN, Jr., in his official capacity as President of the United States; United States of America; Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council; General ... Curiae State of Florida, State of Alaska, State of Arizona, State of Arkansas, State of Georgia, State of Idaho, State of Iowa, State of Kansas, State of Kentucky, State of Missouri, State of ... Instead, the Government would have us say that as this is an exercise of the President's "proprietary authority, as purchaser of ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Ohio – 2022
GBX Assocs. v. United States
"... ... not solely as to an individual party. See, e.g., ... Pennsylvania v. President United States , 930 F.3d 543, ... 575 (3d Cir. 2019) (“[O]ur APA case law suggests that, ... “Use of the ‘setting aside' language [in ... § 706(2)] does not seem to tell us one way or another ... whether to nullify illegal administrative action or not to ... 19 F.4th 890 (6th Cir. 2021) ( en banc ). See also ... Georgia v. President of the United States, 46 F.4th ... 1283, 1304 (11th Cir. 2022) (“By design, ... "
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit – 2023
Commonwealth v. Biden
"... ... Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Joseph R. BIDEN, in his official capacity as President of the United States of America, et al., Defendants-Appellants. No. 21-6147 United States Court of ... , 23 F.4th at 604 (criticizing the government's "heavy reliance" on the purpose statement); Georgia v. President of the United States , 46 F.4th 1283, 1298 (11th Cir. 2022) (opinion of Grant, J.) ... The text of § 121(a) itself tells us as much. The phrase "carry out" requires a task to be done—something "to put into practice or ... "
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit – 2022
Sailboat Bend Sober Living, LLC v. City of Fort Lauderdale
"... ... Nor does our case law compel us to reach a second, justification stage in the analysis when a plaintiff fails to make a prima ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Arizona – 2023
Arizona v. Walsh
"... ... of Labor (“DOL”), the DOL Wage & Hour ... Division, President Joseph R. Biden, and Acting Administrator ... of the DOL Wage & Hour Division Jessica Looman ... ( Id .) See Bradley v. T-Mobile US", Inc ., No ... 17-CV-07232-BLF, 2020 WL 1233924, at *7 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 13, ... 2020) (\xE2" ... v ... Sec'y of Labor , 442 F.2d 159, 170-71 (3d Cir. 1971); ... but see Georgia v. Biden , 46 F.4th 1283, 1293-1301 ... (11th Cir. 2022) (op. of Grant, J.) (adopting a ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
1 firm's commentaries
Document | Mondaq United States – 2024
Corporate Transparency Act Declared Unconstitutional By Alabama Federal Court ' What Does This Mean For Your Company?
"...judicial district, the same judicial district, or even upon the same judge in a different case."); Georgia v. Pres. of the U.S., 46 F.4th 1283, 1304 (11th Cir. 2022) ("The decision of any one of [the federal district or circuit courts] typically has little effect on the other courts of its ..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial