Rights of vaccine refusers
Martin v. International Organization of Masters, Mates & Pilots
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- Daniel B. Martin, a merchant mariner who declined a COVID-19 vaccine, asks the Supreme Court to review his case against the International Organization of Masters, Mates & Pilots and Matson Navigation Company.
- Who it affects
- Martin did not get Supreme Court review, and the denial did not decide the legal questions or endorse either side.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
He asks whether a federal law against conspiracies violating people’s rights protects him, whether the Court should change how it identifies people or groups covered by that law, and whether federal labor law blocks his California assault claim.
The dispute reached the Supreme Court from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Question presented
1. When 42 U.S. Code § 1985(3) provides protection to, “any person or class of persons” against a conspiracy against his rights, does it include the Petitioner, a merchant mariner who declined a COVID-19 vaccine? 2. Are this Court’s methods of determining who falls within the sweeping language of, “any person or class of persons” found in 42 U.S. Code § 1985(3) outdated and in need of revision? 3. Does the National Labor Relations Act preclude a claim of assault under the state of California’s tort laws?
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
New analysis added
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Show 2 moreShow fewer
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.