A high-profile federal trial over Santa Clara County’s COVID-19 employee vaccine policy is set to begin June 1 in San Jose. Three county workers who were placed on unpaid leave after refusing COVID shots say they were pushed into lower-paid roles instead of being offered what they view as reasonable accommodations, and they are seeking back pay and other relief.
Trial Schedule And Courtroom Details
The case is scheduled for June 1 through 12 before U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman, as set out in the pretrial order posted on Justia. The judge held a final pretrial conference in April and issued directions about witnesses and trial procedures ahead of the June start date.
What The Workers Say Happened
The suit, filed Feb. 18, 2022, names registered nurses Maria Ramirez and Elizabeth Baluyut and air conditioning mechanic Tom Davis as plaintiffs. According to filings on GovInfo, the three say they were granted religious exemptions but then were barred from continuing in high-risk positions and instead placed on unpaid leave or steered toward other county jobs that plaintiffs describe as demotions.
How The County Handled Exemptions, According To Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs contend the county offered religious and medical exemptions but funneled exempt employees into an accommodations process that frequently meant unpaid leave rather than weekly testing, remote work or masking. They also told the court that their objections were religious, in part because some COVID-19 vaccines were tested using fetal cell lines, a detail reported by the Palo Alto Daily Post. The complaint seeks back pay for employees who were placed on leave, the filings say.
County Response And Long Legal History
The county has argued in court that decisions taken to protect public health are immune from liability, and county filings show the vaccination requirement was rescinded in late September 2022. The litigation has a long procedural record that could make even seasoned civil lawyers reach for another cup of coffee: an earlier order certified a class but the court later granted decertification in a decision posted on Justia on May 21, 2025, and judges have issued split rulings on summary judgment motions that narrowed some claims ahead of trial.
What To Watch As Testimony Begins
Plaintiffs put roughly 25 people on a witness list, including former County Executive Jeff Smith, Public Health Officer Dr. Sarah Rudman and Sheriff’s Lt. Adam Valle, according to the Palo Alto Daily Post. Expect the legal arguments to center on who had decision-making authority over accommodations, whether the county applied the Risk Tier system consistently, and whether each individual plaintiff can prove they suffered compensable harm from the county’s actions.
The trial will be closely watched in San Jose because it sits at the intersection of religious accommodation law, public health authority and county personnel rules. Proceedings begin June 1, and we will monitor filings and testimony and report material developments as the case unfolds.
