Judges reject employee claims, giving HR more certainty on enforcing workplace vaccine rules
Healthcare employers can breathe a little easier after the Tenth Circuit, on October 21, 2025, sided with hospitals in a high-profile vaccine mandate case.
The lawsuit sprang from the pandemic’s most heated debates: Should employers be able to require COVID-19 vaccinations as a condition of employment? For HR leaders, especially in healthcare, the answer from the courts is now clearer than ever.
The case centered on two Colorado healthcare employers – South Denver Cardiology Associates and the University of Colorado Hospital Authority – who fired staff members for refusing to comply with workplace COVID-19 vaccine policies. These policies, rolled out after the FDA’s emergency authorization of the first vaccines, required all employees to either get vaccinated or apply for a medical or religious exemption. The employees at the heart of the case chose not to get vaccinated and did not seek exemptions. Their employers, sticking to the policy, let them go.
The fired workers didn’t go quietly. They sued, arguing that a patchwork of federal laws, constitutional rights, and even contracts protected their right to decline the vaccine without losing their jobs. They claimed that the Emergency Use Authorization statute, the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, and other legal sources gave them enforceable rights. They also said their constitutional rights to due process and equal protection had been violated, and that they were third-party beneficiaries of certain federal agreements between the government and healthcare providers.
But the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals was not persuaded. In its October 21 decision, the court backed the lower courts’ dismissals of all claims. The judges found that none of the statutes cited by the employees actually created individual rights that could be enforced in this context. The court said the laws in question were aimed at regulating how the government and healthcare providers handle vaccines – not at giving employees a right to refuse them without consequences at work.
The court also rejected the constitutional arguments, finding that the right to continued employment without vaccination is not a fundamental right under the Constitution. The breach of contract claims didn’t fare any better, with the court noting that the employees hadn’t pointed to any specific contract language that gave them the protections they claimed.
For those in healthcare, the decision is a green light for enforcing vaccine mandates – so long as the policies allow for legitimate medical and religious exemptions. The ruling offers reassurance that broad federal statutes and constitutional claims are unlikely to derail well-crafted workplace health policies.
This outcome is particularly relevant as organizations continue to navigate the aftermath of the pandemic and consider how to handle future public health challenges. The court’s decision gives HR leaders more confidence to set clear expectations and maintain safe workplaces, knowing that the law is on their side when it comes to reasonable, exemption-compliant vaccine requirements.
With the Tenth Circuit’s decision now final, HR teams can look to this case as a touchstone for policy decisions, compliance, and employee communications in a post-pandemic world.
