Take a look at Amy’s recent TV appearances where she discusses relevant legal topics for a wide audience!
“Ezra Exposed”: Local Author Publishes New Book About Cell Phones for Kids. FOX 29, 11/12/22
ANDERSON
So if you have a kid of a certain age a big concern is when you should get them a cell phone. We’ve had those discussions. And how do you monitor what they’re doing? There’s a new book about a boy who gets a cell phone for his birthday, uses it to take pictures, and you can figure out that that can be a problem. It brings some unwanted attention after one of his photos goes viral. I got all of your titles and everything, but just – friend of the show, attorney, author, Amy Feldman.
FELDMAN
My favorite title.
ANDERSON
The new book, Ezra Exposed. We actually both started doing segments on 29 years ago.
FELDMAN
All those years ago.
ANDERSON
Right?
FELDMAN
Exactly. Even though we are still so young.
ANDERSON
It’s our favorite. Now is our favorite. It is great to see you. Thanks for coming in.
FELDMAN
It’s wonderful to see you. Thank you.
ANDERSON
So you’re always giving advice, good advice, legal advice, entertaining advice. What inspired you to write the book?
FELDMAN
So I have a friend who called me because he had just gotten a call from his son’s middle school principal. The principal had his son and the police in the office with him because the son and a group of his friends had been exchanging naked photos with a group of girls. And they all had this idea that, you know, well, if, if you send me your picture, then we won’t tell on each other. We’ve each got the goods on one another. That makes total sense in the mind of a 13 year old, right? And of course, they did not expect that a 13 year old boy would act exactly as you would expect a 13 year old boy would when he gets a topless photo of a girl in his class, which is he showed it to everybody, which required, you know, bubbled up to the principal who by law was required to report it to the police because that is child pornography. People don’t realize that the taking or transmission of a nude photo or a lewd photo of a minor is child pornography, even if the child is taking it of himself. Right?
ANDERSON
So that that inspires you and you like for years you’ve been answering those types of questions, obviously, in your profession, but on TV as well. Yeah. So you’re like, all right, I got to share this information to more people.
FELDMAN
Right? Because I started to look around for resources for the youngest. Like as soon as you’re getting this cell phone and people are afraid to say to kids, oh, and don’t take naked pictures because you certainly don’t want to have your kids say, “take naked pictures? Great idea!” Right? Exactly. So this book does not use the word sexting, but it’s a story like sort of a “Ramona the Brave Gets a Cell Phone,” but it’s a boy who gets a phone, takes it of funny things, which is for a ten year old boy, things that look like butts and then, you know, wants to maintain the popularity that he is gaining and eventually takes a picture that gets him into trouble. That’s what the book is about. But it’s the first way, the first talk, that parents can have about body boundaries and also about what happens when you send a photo that gets out of your hands.
ANDERSON
So entertaining with legal knowledge, but who is it for? So for the parents, the kids?
FELDMAN
Good question. So it’s written for a kid, right? It’s written as if you would read, you know, “Junie B. Jones,” “Ramona,” or all of the others, “Diary of a Wimpy Kid.” But it’s also for the parents to read with the kids and for teachers, because there is a lesson in there in a way. You know, when you start lecturing a kid, they turn off their ears. But if you can talk about someone else now, you might have them. And that’s the idea.
ANDERSON
And there’s a guide, there’s education companion.
FELDMAN
There is and there is a companion curriculum which is free. So just a couple pages. But it gives parents like talking points, like what does it mean to be popular and what’s the difference between a friend in real life and a friend online? Can they be the same or are they ever different? And what should you do? But it also has it for older kids. Like what’s profanity? Can the school discipline you for something you say on your Facebook page or Instagram?
ANDERSON
For as long as I’ve known you, you’ve been using your voice for good. So I appreciate you doing that again. We put it up on the screen where people can get the book, get copies of it. It’s available now.
FELDMAN
It’s available now.
ANDERSON
Get it. Get Ezra Exposed. All those questions that Amy’s been answering for years. You can do it and do it in a way that’s acceptable to kids.
FELDMAN
Thank you.
ANDERSON
Thank you so much.
Thanks to Bill Anderson and FOX 29 for having me on to talk about my new book, Ezra Exposed!
Supreme Court to Revisit if Business Owners can Refuse Service to Same-Sex Couples. FOX 29 News, 06/03/22
O’CONNELL
The Supreme Court will soon revisit whether business owners may refuse services to same sex couples. That’ll happen this Fall.
TIMMENEY
And with Pride Month happening now, we want to put it on your radar. So joining us now to talk about this is attorney Amy Feldman. Thank you for being here with us. Amy, explain what the conflict is. You can’t discriminate. So why is there still a question?
FELDMAN
Right. That is the question. And the issue is that we have more than one fundamental right that’s at issue here. On the one hand, you have the right not to face discrimination on the basis of your gender orientation or your sexual orientation. On the other hand, the Constitution gives people the right to practice their religion and they can’t be forced to be told how to do it. So this is a case that involves that conflict.
O’CONNELL
Wasn’t – Amy – wasn’t there a case like this before? Has – I want to say maybe the Supreme Court ruled on something like this?
FELDMAN
You’re exactly right, Chris. A couple of years back, there was a case in which a baker in Colorado who was a religious Christian did not want to make a cake, a wedding cake, for a gay wedding. He said that based on – his businesses is based on his faith, so he would never bake cakes with rum in them or any alcohol. He would never make Halloween cakes. And he didn’t feel it was right to make a cake for a gay wedding. And that case went all the way up to the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court said he is correct; he does not have to violate the principles of his religion by being forced to make what is basically a piece of art, according to him, which is the cake. But that case was so narrow that it really only applied to his situation. It really didn’t speak to anything else. Like could the venue refuse to allow it? What about a photographer? What about a florist? So there is still some question about where those rights are going to land.
TIMMENEY
So what did the court then – I remember that case very clearly. So when – what did the court say in the past?
FELDMAN
Right. Good question. So it’s, it’s dependent on state law. And when asked to, to answer that question again, the Supreme Court has always refused to handle, hear any of these cases until this one. And this is an interesting case, guys, because this one is about a woman who is a website designer. And while she says she will service clients who are LGBT, what she will not do is create a website for a gay wedding because again, to her, that violates her faith. But this case is based on her right to free speech. Does she have to write this or will she be able to say no on whose rights? Basically, people on both sides are going to feel their right is trampled if they are forced one way or the other.
O’CONNELL
Amy –
FELDMAN
That’s what this case is.
O’CONNELL
I’m elevating you to the Supreme Court right now. What do you think? What do you think’s going to happen in this case?
FELDMAN
Right. If I were to think like the Supreme Court, based on what we’ve seen in the past, the fact of the matter is that the right to free speech is one of the most fundamental constitutional rights. And because they’ve limited this case to a free speech issue, my guess is that like the baker, they’re going to say that this woman will not be required to make the website for the gay wedding. However, I don’t again think that the Supreme Court is gonna to, you know, opine more broadly. That’ll give us sort of a sense of where is the line. So we may still be seeing more cases like this for quite some time. That’s my guess.
TIMMENEY
All right. Thank you, Attorney Amy Feldman.
O’CONNELL
Thanks, Amy.
FELDMAN
Thank you.
This Fall, the Supreme Court will hear a case on whether a computer programmer has to make a website for a gay wedding. Thanks to FOX 29 News at 5 for letting me discuss it! You can find more videos like this on their website.
ANNOUNCER 1
The Supreme Court spent the day hearing arguments on whether or not the Biden administration can enforce vaccine mandates, masking, and weekly testing. Right now, it’s for large private companies and places that receive federal funding, and it’s been a controversial topic. Here to talk about it with us right now is attorney Amy E. Feldman. Amy, thanks for joining us. It seems like the Supreme Court heard this case in record time. I guess they had to, right?
FELDMAN
Absolutely. Yeah. What had happened was when the – when OSHA had originally put out this mandate, there were lawsuits immediately across the country. And then courts hearing it came to different conclusions and even appeals courts were coming to different conclusions. So the Supreme Court took the case and put it right to the top of its docket.
ANNOUNCER 2
And today we heard those arguments, Amy, oral arguments. Of course, we can’t see that no fa- no cameras in federal court. Can you get a sense of how they’ll decide? Reports there must be some skepticism on the high courts with these mandates.
FELDMAN
Right. So you can’t see it. You’re right, Chris, but you can hear the arguments and what you are trying to do when you’re listening to them is sort of glean from the tea leaves what is actually going through the justices’ minds. And in some cases it was very clear. Justice Kagan, Justice Sotomayor, Justice Breyer basically said, “I don’t know why this mandate hasn’t already been rolled out. Every minute we waste, you know, not allowing it is another minute the people are getting COVID at the workplace.” They were very clear that they’re in favor of it. But among the conservative justices, there seemed to be a split, interestingly. So Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kavanaugh, Justice Barrett seemed to suggest that while OSHA might have the authority to make a mandate about vaccines at the workplace, something like this was just too broad, that all employers with more than a hundred employees would have to impose it. They suggested that it, you know, maybe at meatpacking plants where people are standing shoulder to shoulder, or at medical facilities, they might be able to, but this might be too broad as it’s written, or that’s what they suggested. And then Justice Alito was pretty clear and will likely be joined by Justices Thomas and – and – and it’s possible that what they’re going to say is is, you know, look, what you’ve done here is you have created a mandate that doesn’t just affect workers, you’re OSHA, you’re the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. What you’ve done is created a mandate that takes care of the whole worker. Once you’re vaccinated, you’re vaccinated throughout your whole life, not just the hours that you’re at the office. And they were really questioning, Justice Alito in particular, do you have the right? Does OSHA have the right to do that? So, you know, it sort of remains to be seen who’s going to fall on what side of this argument.
ANNOUNCER 1
And obviously, it’s controversial. A lot of people want, you know, have an opinion on this. So in the end, what do you think?
FELDMAN
You know, I have to say that I’ve spoken with a lot of my colleagues who suggest, who think that it’s likely that this mandate, at least as written, is going to get struck down. I have to say I’m not so sure. I think it might be cut back and/or they might send OSHA back to make, you know, mandates that are sort of a little more narrowly tailored. But I’m not certain that it is going to be eliminated, and I think that companies are probably best off at least coming up with contingent plans because if it’s allowed to stand, companies have to figure out a way to make sure that either they have an employee’s vaccine card or that they’ve got a way to make sure that unvaccinated employees are getting tested twice a week and are masked while they’re at the office. So I don’t think it’s premature to start creating that plan in the event that it’s not struck down.
ANNOUNCER 1
Exactly. All right, attorney Amy E. Feldman, thank you so much for joining us.
FELDMAN
Thank you.
The Supreme Court is hearing arguments on OSHA’s COVID vaccine mandate. Thank you, FOX 29 News for having me on to discuss it! You can watch this video and more on FOX 29’s website.
COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Will Head Head to Supreme Court Friday. Good Day Philadelphia 1/4/22
JERRICK
Everybody here, New Year, new rules, there are several new laws in place and coming in the next few days, some more laws may be in place. I’m talking basically about the vaccine mandates. Hi, Amy Feldman, attorney.
FELDMAN
Hi, Mike, how are you?
JERRICK
Good. Good, good. So when we heard vaccine mandates, people started – there was big blowback. You know, judges saying, “no, not so fast here.” People want to get back to work. We’ve talked about the schools. Let’s talk about people trying to get back to work. There may be a vaccine mandate staring them in the face. So who’s going to decide? Has this made it all the way to the Supreme Court?
FELDMAN
It will on Friday. Exactly. It went to different courts across the country, which came out differently. And because there was a split among the different circuits that heard the appeals, the Supreme Court now has agreed to hear it on the quickest time frame ever. They’re going to hear the case on Friday. They won’t have a decision, probably on that date, although you’ll get some clues about where they’re thinking it’ll go based on the questions that they will ask of the attorneys on both sides. And then once they render their decision, we will know whether employers with 100 or more employees are going to have to force a vaccine or require weekly testing. Remains to be seen. It’s a biggie.
JERRICK
Yeah, man, this is really fast moving by a Supreme Court. I don’t know that I’ve ever seen them move this fast, but it’s so important because we’re trying to get people back to work. What are you hearing? Where do you think this is going to go? I mean, it’s a pretty conservative court.
FELDMAN
It is a conservative court, but it has been one that so far, I mean, when we look at the things that OSHA has done in the past under their emergency powers, like not allowing evictions, the Supreme Court actually allowed that eviction stay to remain in place, although they did say that they weren’t likely to continue it. I mean, they were sort of indicating that they were at the end of their rope on that one. So there – there is a question about it, but I don’t know that this is just going to be a slam dunk, no vaccine mandate from the Supreme Court.
JERRICK
Okay. So, if the Supreme Court sides with the folks that want a vaccine mandate, what does that mean for if I go to work and I have, I work for a company that has 100 employees.
FELDMAN
Right. So –
JERRICK
Gotta get vaxed.
Feldman
That – yeah, that’s exactly right. They’re not making it easy for you. OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, has said that as a matter of occupational health, you have to if you are an employer, enforce these rules that say that all of your employees must be vaccinated unless they have an exemption. And if there is some exemption granted, then you have to require that people are going to get tested every week at their own expense, by the way, and on their own time.
JERRICK
All eyes on the Supreme Court Friday. We won’t get the decision until next week. Amy, thanks.
FELDMAN
Thank you.
JERRICK
We got a quick break.
Thanks to Good Day Philadelphia for having me on to discuss the Supreme Court’s hearing on the OSHA Vaccine Mandate! You can watch this interview and more on the FOX 29 website!
Elements Festival Attendees File Class Action Lawsuit. FOX 29 News, 12/09/21
Elements Festival Attendees File Class Action Lawsuit
JERRICK
Sounds like Woodstock, you know, when it rained? Hi, Amy.
HOLLEY
So, we have attorney Amy E. Feldman joining us here in the studio. Good morning to you.
FELDMAN
Good morning!
HOLLEY
So now it’s a class action lawsuit. The question is, do they have a case? Do you think they’ll be able to win this one?
FELDMAN
I don’t actually think it’s ever gonna get to court. I think this one’s gonna settle. They’ve already said that, you know, they apologized and they even made an offer, which was you could get 33% off of next year’s tickets, so –
JERRICK
No thank you.
FELDMAN
Right? If you had to wait ten hours to get in and so-called sixteen hours for a port-a-potty, I don’t really see anybody taking them up on that offer.
HOLLEY AND JERRICK
No.
FELDMAN
Their counteroffer was, yeah, here’s a class action lawsuit, so that one’s already failed.
JERRICK
I suppose they should have canceled it, because we knew Ida was coming.
FELDMAN
Right, but it wasn’t – you know, Ida happened before the festival.
JERRICK
Yeah.
FELDMAN
So, what you see here is the aftermath of Ida, and that’s one of their claims, which is they should have had enough time or notice to clean the parking lot, right? I mean, it was a muddy mess according to the lawsuit, and the camping was disgusting, the place was disgusting, there was not enough time for people to get in and see the concert. In other words, you know, the thing about this lawsuit is, nobody is expecting that a festival is going to be like, accommodations that would be suitable for the Queen of England right?
HOLLEY AND JERRICK
True.
FELDMAN
And no matter how many girls in white bikinis we just saw in that commercial, that’s not what you’re getting. And I think most reasonable festival-goers know it’s gonna be disgusting, right?
JERRICK
What are they asking for?
FELDMAN
So, here’s what they’re asking. What they’re saying – well, they’re asking for money.
JERRICK
Money back.
FELDMAN
Um, right. And, of course, with any class action lawsuit, you know the lawyers are gonna get their share of that. But the idea is, you know, you gotta be better prepared for this. If you know that you’re in the middle of COVID, you need to follow the protocols that you’ve promised. You need to make sure you have enough staff there. People waited ten hours and largely missed that first whole day of the festival on Friday. So the question isn’t, “how beautiful was this experience?” The question was, “what did you promise I was gonna get and then what did you deliver?”
HOLLEY
But can they come back and say, “hey, we literally had a hurricane come through, it’s an extenuating circumstance. What were we – you know, it’s an outdoor location, of course it’s gonna be different once a hurricane comes through.”
FELDMAN
Well, I think that people would understand if the hurricane blew through in the middle of it. Like, they’re trying to get it in, and then this hurricane –
JERRICK
– yeah, before, but –
FELDMAN
– this happened –
HOLLEY
But it takes a lot to clean up after a hurricane, though –
FELDMAN
So then you make all of the precautions you need to. Which is, you hire thousands of people to clean it up, or if you can’t clean it up – and it’s hard to say how a festival ground after a hurricane would be able to be cleaned up –
HOLLEY
Right.
FELDMAN
– Then you postpone it. And I understand that’s a logistical nightmare that’s gonna cost them a lot of money, but, you know, say what you will about lawyers, the idea that you gotta factor in the cost of the lawsuit if it does go south is gonna make them pay more money upfront the next time to make sure they’ve taken precautions.
HOLLEY
But where’s the line, though?
JERRICK
Yeah.
HOLLEY
Because we’ve had festivals and we’ve had some situations recently, though. But how do you know, or who’s to say that if you go and you’re like “hey, this is not what I thought it would be, let me go ahead and sue them.” How do we know that this won’t just keep happening because you didn’t get the level of experience – now, granted, this is obviously a different situation, but where’s the line?
FELDMAN
Right. Right. So the line is, they’re arguing fraud. That, first of all, you promised acts that never even showed up. Second of all, you promised that there would be COVID protocols that did not happen. Third of all, that you would have enough staff to be able to get us into the festival. Then we can worry about how disgusting the conditions are once we get there. But the idea is that it’s not so much that you’re gonna get a perfect experience. You should know that. And, you know, there is something to be said about the fact that anybody can sue at any time for anything.
JERRICK
And another thing, Amy E. Feldman, Mark Geragos’s law firm is representing the people that are suing. I mean, my God, think of the high-profile cases he’s covered. Michael Jackson, Winona Ryder, he goes on and on and on and on. There he is.
FELDMAN
Right. There he is, right? So you know that if he’s put his name on this, this is not a case that he thinks is a nothing case, because he doesn’t have to take those cases. So this is a – I think this is a legit case. I just don’t think it’s ever gonna get to court because they’ll settle.
HOLLEY
Well, here’s the statement, the festival’s statement on the lawsuit. They said, “we have not yet have time to review this, but the case doesn’t appear to have any merit. Despite the impacts of COVID globally and Hurricane Ida days before the festival, we persevered and produced a show where thousands of guests had a great time. We remain focused on our amazing new venue for 2022 and following our plan to elevate all aspects of our next festival.”
JERRICK
They’re moving forward!
FELDMAN
Right? Yeah, well, they’re not declaring bankruptcy like Fyre, right? At least not yet. We’ll see how much this costs them.
JERRICK
Amy E., thank you.
HOLLEY
Thank you.
FELDMAN
Thank you, guys.
Thanks to Alex Holley, Mike Jerrick, and the rest of the FOX 29 Philadelphia crew for having me on to discuss the Elements Festival lawsuit! You can see this video and more on the FOX 29 website.
TRANSCRIPT
VA Mandates COVID-19 Vaccine for Medical Employees, Staff
DRAYTON
Tonight it’s the first in the country impacting frontline workers here. Doctors and nurses who are some of the first eligible for the COVID vaccine and now thousands will no longer have a choice. Great to have you with us here. I’m Thomas Drayton.
TIMMENEY
And I’m Dawn Timmeney. Today a federal agency announced: work in a VA medical center? Get the vaccine. And Chris, some of the people you spoke to didn’t even know yet.
O’CONNELL
Yes, Dawn, and it could signal a sign of things to come for all of us. Frontline medical workers here at the VA medical center are being told if they don’t have the vaccine, they may not have a job. Doctors, nurses, and staff that run the nation’s veterans medical centers will now have to be vaccinated or they could be fired. Dr. Shaan Sadiq is one of them.
SADIQ
It’s smart from a business standpoint, and it’s also, more importantly in my mind, smart from a global and public health perspective. You know, we have people at risk and those people are directly affected by our decision to get vaccinated or not.
O’CONNELL
The Department of Veterans Affairs announced that it’s requiring 115,000 patient-facing medical employees to be fully vaccinated by mid-September. In a statement, the Secretary of the VA says whenever a Veteran or teammate sets foot in a VA facility, they deserve to know we have done everything in our power to keep them safe. Most we talked with say requiring vaccines, especially in a healthcare setting makes sense.
VULLECK
Not only here, I’ve worked in other places. We’ve had to have the flu vaccine for years now to stay employed. This is just another vaccine.
O’CONNELL
Now a government agency is requiring vaccines to work, some think private companies won’t be far behind.
FELDMAN
Either he gets vaccinated or I stop coming to the office because you can’t protect my young children.
O’CONNELL
It’s an issue attorney Amy E. Feldman says employers will soon have to grapple with.
FELDMAN
When the federal government has made this decision, I’ll bet you’ll see a lot of private employers who have wondered, “can I, can’t I?” and now with all the discussion they will decide they can and they will.
O’CONNELL
And right now there are no federal laws preventing employers from requiring vaccines, but there are exceptions for medical and religious reasons, Thomas.
Thanks to FOX 29 Philadelphia for letting me discuss the new Veterans Affairs vaccine mandates! For more, visit their website.
TRANSCRIPT
Changes are Coming to Unemployment Benefits in Pennsylvania
HUMPHRIES
In “Your Money” news tonight, 26 states, including Pennsylvania will soon require recipients of unemployment benefits to prove they are actively looking for work. That change happens Sunday, so attorney Amy Feldman is here to help break all this down for us. Hello, and thank you for joining us, Amy.
FELDMAN
It’s a pleasure. Thank you so much for having me.
HUMPHRIES
Well, we’re happy to have you. So, explain specifically what happens Sunday for those who are unemployed.
FELDMAN
Right, so, it used to be, pre-pandemic, that people had to prove if they were going to stay on unemployment, that they were actually actively searching for work. And that was put on pause during the pandemic, but those requirements of an active job search are now back effective Sunday, July 18th. Now, to collect unemployment in Pennsylvania, you are going to have to show that not only did you apply for two jobs, but that you engaged in a “work search activity” according to the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry.
HUMPHRIES
Okay, so tell us what that is, “work search activity,” what exactly does that mean?
FELDMAN
Right, so, it means that you can’t just sit around and send an electronic resume to the cyberspace, you actually have to do something active about it. For example, and they listed – the Department of Labor and Industry lists the the things that you could do to prove that it’s an active search. Go to a job fair, or you could post your resume on the Pennsylvania career link website, or you could take – avail yourself of the programs they have there. You could also network. You could call an employment agency and register there. But it’s not enough just to send out a resume, you actually have to be active about your job search now.
HUMPHRIES
And continue it regularly.
FELDMAN
Exactly.
HUMPHRIES
Okay, so, how about that extra Federal Unemployment Payment, a lot of people have been talking about it, it’s being blamed for a lot of people not going to work. So, was that still in effect and what’s the future of that?
FELDMAN
Right, so actually, about 25 states have done away with it. It is scheduled to phase out in early September in any event. But some states have made the decision that it’s preventing people from going to work, and so they’ve stopped it. For the viewers here, Pennsylvania – New Jersey, and Pennsylvania are not among the states that have so far ended it, although there’s a bill right now in the Pennsylvania House that could possibly end it and it would be coupled instead with a “get back to work” bonus, but so far that’s stuck in debate and may not even in fact really come to a vote until it’s going to end either way September 4th.
HUMPRHIES
Sure, and that is coming up fast, so it might be safe to assume it could be coming to an end. Amy, thanks so much for your time today
FELDMAN
Thank you.
Thank you to FOX 29 Philadelphia for having me on to explain how some COVID-related unemployment benefits are ending. You can see more on the FOX 29 website!
TRANSCRIPT
Is it Legal for an Employer to Ask if You are Vaccinated?
ANNOUNCER
For months we’ve talked about getting vaccinated, and while we wait for most people to get their shot in the arm, we’ve been asked a lot if companies and employers could force you to get a shot, and if asking about your vaccination status is against any HIPAA laws, so we brought in legal expert Amy Feldman to answer some of these questions that so many people have been asking. How are you, Amy?
FELDMAN
I’m doing terrific, thank you.
ANNOUNCER
Great to have you with us this evening. So many questions, and so let’s start with this one: is a company violating the law if they make you show proof of vaccination?
FELDMAN
They are not. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has said that it’s not a violation for an employer to require that you are vaccinated and to prove it.
ANNOUNCER
Wow, okay. Let’s back up a little bit. Can you explain what HIPAA is?
FELDMAN
Right, so everybody talks about a HIPAA violation, but they’re, for the most part, using that wrong, because HIPAA, the Health Insurance Accountability and Portability Act actually only covers institutions that hold your medical records, like your doctor, your dentist or your insurance company. Your employer doesn’t hold your medical records, it has to ask you for your medical records. So, what people, I think, mean when they say “isn’t this a violation of HIPAA?” is “doesn’t this violate my right to medical privacy?”
ANNOUNCER
Yeah, that’s what I thought.
FELDMAN
And so – yeah, right. So, the answer to that question is simply asking whether someone’s been vaccinated does not violate your right to medical privacy.
ANNOUNCER
Okay. Let’s take it a step further then. What about employers? Can they ask you to get the shot?
FELDMAN
Yes.
ANNOUNCER
Wow.
FELDMAN
So that’s another thing that – I know, it’s surprising, right? Um, because, we know that school districts have required kids to get vaccinated, but until now only certain types of employers have required vaccinations. For example, people who work in hospital settings have, for a long time, been required to get vaccinated. Now other employers have the right to ask that because we’re in the middle of a pandemic. That said, there are exceptions to that where an employer may not require that you get vaccinated.
ANNOUNCER
Okay, let’s hear it.
FELDMAN
Okay, so, if you have a medical reason why you cannot be vaccinated, and your employer says to you – can ask the question “have you been vaccinated?”, if you say “I can’t be vaccinated because of a medical condition”, in that case, the employer may be in danger if they ask follow-up questions of finding out medical information that they don’t have the right to learn, and/or if you can’t be vaccinated and they fire you for it, but the reason you can’t is because of a medical reason, there may be a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act if there would be other reasonable accommodations that they could make so that you and your coworkers would remain safe even if you aren’t vaccinated.
ANNOUNCER
There’s this widely believed notion that employers don’t have this much power, but they do.
FELDMAN
In this case they do.
ANNOUNCER
They do.
FELDMAN
It’s not always the case, right? Because there are special rules here because the CDC and the government and the World Health Organization have all said that we’re still in the midst of this pandemic. Even though we’re very fortunate here that in most areas of the country our numbers are really going down, but, for now, the government has said that employers can ask in an effort to keep people safe.
ANNOUNCER
Yeah. Okay, Amy, thank you so much for your expertise and have a great weekend. Thanks for joining us.
AMY
Thank you
Thank you to FOX 29 News for having me on to discuss whether or not your employer can require you to get a COVID shot! For more, you can visit the FOX 29 website.