On August 12, the Supreme Court of the United States denied eight students’ request to block Indiana University’s requirement that students be vaccinated against the coronavirus. Justice Amy Coney Barrett rejected the request without comment, without seeking a response from the state and without referring the request to the full court for a vote. Justice Barrett’s denial indicates the court’s belief that the students’ challenge was not a particularly close case.
To read the full text of this Duane Morris Alert, please visit the firm website.
We have entered a new phase in the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.
We no longer wake up every day to increasing numbers of deaths, infections, and reminders about social distancing and vaccine shortages. Instead, we now read about record low numbers of infections, limited fatalities, and a domestic surplus of vaccine so large that we are now vaccinating children as young as 12 and may be exporting it by June.
And, just last week, the CDC dispensed with mask guidance for vaccinated people. This prompted President Biden to host his first “maskless” appearance of his presidency. For college leaders planning the summer and fall semesters, it’s a 180-degree turnaround that we were afraid to hope for just last year.
Yet here we are. The question now vexing colleges is how to safely reopen on-ground learning with a pandemic in retreat. It’s a nice problem to have, but it still has to be solved.
To read the full text of this article by Duane Morris partner Edward M. Cramp, please visit the University Business website.
As states have opened COVID-19 vaccinations to all individuals 16 and older (and are expanding to age 12 and older, based on the CDC advisory committee’s recent recommendation), institutions of higher education, like many other employers, are considering whether to encourage or possibly mandate their employees to receive a vaccination. Unlike other organizations, institutions of higher education have the added quandary of whether to encourage or mandate COVID-19 vaccinations for students in an effort to return to full in-person instruction.
To read the full text of this Duane Morris Alert, please visit the firm website.
On March 10, 2021, Congress passed the Biden Administration’s American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA). Building on previous Congressional relief bills – the CARES Act and the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA) – the ARPA commits significant resources to colleges and universities. In fact, the ARPA directs more money to institutions, in overall totals, than either of the CARES Act or the CRRSAA. Continue reading “The Higher Education Provisions of The American Rescue Plan Act and What to Expect Next”
On February 25th, the U.S. Department of Education published a notice requesting comment on proposed eligibility criteria for implementing the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA), Section 314(a)(3) program, called the Supplemental Aid to Institutions of Higher Education (SAIHE) Program for which Congress authorized at set aside of Higher Education Emergency Relief Funds (HEERF). The notice also requests public comment on the proposed criteria and application information that the Department will use to determine eligibility. Only public and non-profit institutions of higher education are eligible for funding under Section 314(a)(3).
According to the notice, the Department is proposing to use the following institutional criteria to determine SAIHE eligibility of those institutions with the greatest unmet needs related to COVID-19: Continue reading “U.S. Department of Education Solicits Comments on Proposed Institutional Eligibility Criteria for HEERF Supplemental Aid”
On January 21, 2021, President Biden issued an Executive Order on Protecting Worker Health and Safety. On January 29th, OSHA issued new comprehensive guidance. (See OSHA’s COVID-19 guidance here)
This recent guidance is intended to inform employers and workers outside of the healthcare industry and to assist them in determining up-to-date and appropriate control measures to implement. The guidance encourages employers to create and adhere to a COVID-19 Prevention Program and include the following key elements: conducting a hazard assessment; identifying a combination of measures that limit COVID-19 spread; adopting measures to ensure that workers who are sick are separated and sent home; and implementing protections from retaliation for workers who raise COVID-19 related concerns. The guidance recommends that employers provide all workers with face coverings at no cost. OSHA also notes that, in order to keep employees safe, it is critical that employers monitor compliance with workplace guidelines. Continue reading “Guidance and Considerations for Masks on Campus: Students and Employees”
With a month in office, the Biden Administration is taking steps to reveal its COVID-19 policy approach to international students and academics. On January 25, 2021, the President announced Proclamation #10143, which extended the previous administration’s limitation on travel to the U.S. from the Schengen Area, the United Kingdom, and Ireland. On February 10, 2021, the Department of State confirmed that national interest exceptions (NIE) to the travel ban, first issued in October 2020, will remain in place in the new administration. Continue reading “Biden Administration Confirms Continued Exceptions for Certain International Students and Academics”
A common question for colleges today is whether to reduce tuition prices if they cannot provide on-campus classes due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The short answer, both legally and morally, is that colleges should not charge students for services they cannot or do not deliver.
The ultimate answer is more complex and requires a disaggregating analysis of the services that that were included in the price of tuition, including a review of the value associated with in-person interactions.
To read the full text of this article by Duane Morris partner Tony Guida, please visit the University Business website.
Since the global pandemic forced most college campuses to resort to online instruction in March 2020, college students across the country have filed more than 150 lawsuits against their schools seeking refunds of tuition and related fees.
This month, a federal judge in Boston made the first dispositive ruling in such a case against Northeastern University – tossing out most of the claims asserted by the students in a putative class-action matter. Judge Richard G. Stearns of the District of Massachusetts found in Chong v Northeastern University, 20-10844-RGS, that the contract between the university and its students (the Financial Responsibility Agreement, “FRA”) did not specifically include a right to in-person instruction. The Judge noted that the FRA ties the payment of tuition to the registration for courses, “not to the receipt of any particular method of course instruction.”
The Judge also dismissed the students’ claims seeking a refund of certain student fees, such as student activity fees, finding that they paid the fees to support certain campus facilities – not necessarily to gain access to them. Thus, the Court gave no credence to the students’ claims that they should receive a refund of activity fees because the school prevented them from accessing those facilities due to the pandemic.
However, the Court did allow the students’ claims seeking a refund of campus recreation fees to go forward, finding that the students’ payment of those fees may have implicitly created a right to attend home athletic events and use the campus gym and fitness facilities, which ceased on March 12.
Judge Stearns’ ruling may be a sign of things to come for the many similar lawsuits currently pending against colleges and universities throughout the country. However, as in this case or any breach of contract action, these rulings will likely turn on the specific language of the applicable contract between the institution and the student.