Headlines indicate Indiana students sue over COVID-19 vaccine requirement
Even if the institution is a state university, doesn't every educational institution have the responsibility and authority to set vaccination policy? Would this not be based on precedent?
It looks like one of the arguments raised by plaintiffs is that the policy violates Indiana's anti-vaccine-passport law, HB 1405 (see page 10 of the full text), which was just signed into law in late April 2021. Obviously previous precedent would not have taken this law into account, and it is possible that IU's policy, even if it had been upheld as legal under previous law, may be in violation of this new law. The courts will have to decide anew.
Part of the controversy is that the new law only forbids "the state or a local unit" from requiring "immunization passports". According to https://wgntv.com/news/what-does-indianas-new-vaccine-passport-law-do/, part of IU's argument is that they are neither the state nor a local unit, that such wording is generally understood in Indiana law to not include public universities, and that the legislature deliberately chose that wording in order to exclude public universities.
The complaint does not allege that the university lacks authority to mandate vaccinations, though it raises many other legal objections. The university has a mandate to require proof of immunization via IC 21-40-5-3 for specific diseases (covid is not on the list). IC 21-40-3-1 also says that "The board of trustees of a state educational institution may set the conditions and standards of admission of students upon criteria that are in the best interests of the state and the state educational institution", which is part of the legislative authorization hook that could allows such a requirement.
An obligation to require proof of immunity would have to come from a legislative act, such as as the diphtheria vaccination mandate (a university has no alternative). The option to require vaccination follows from the general powers of the IU Board of Trustees (who then empower the president of the university...). The prohibition of such a requirement would be based on other law, which is the legal subject of the suit.
