This is by way of a food for though exercise. I will attempt to make the case that the vaccine mandates fall under the purview of “religious activity” as defined in Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of the Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819, 825 (U.S. 1995) “Religious Activity is defined as any activity that primarily promotes or manifests a particular belief in or about a deity or an ultimate reality.” ref: https://definitions.uslegal.com/r/religious-activity/ and in 42 USCS § 2000e [Title 42. The Public Health and Welfare; Chapter 21. Civil Rights; Equal Employment Opportunities] “religion includes “all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief,” ref: https://definitions.uslegal.com/r/religion/.

1. The current crop of coronavirus “vaccines” were developed under emergency authorization. They have been in use for less than a year as of this writing. Therefore any attestations that the “vaccines” are safe and effective are limited to the information obtained since they were introduced earlier this year. There is by no means any current long term studies into the efficacy or safety of said “vaccines”. As in these “vaccines” have not been available for even one year therefore it is inconceivable that there is long term human testing via this current crop of “vaccinations”.
2. The Websters dictionary prior to this pandemic defined vaccines as “any preparation used to render an organism immune to some disease, by inducing or increasing the natural immunity mechanisms. Prior to 1995, such preparations usually contained killed organisms of the type for which immunity was desired, and sometimes used live organisms having attenuated virulence. Since that date, preparations containing only specific antigenic portions of the pathogenic organism have also been used. Some of these are prepared by genetic engineering techniques.”ref: https://webster-dictionary.org/definition/vaccine. In the 2021 edition the new definitions were promulgated to include MRNA vaccines, however this definition and the vaccines themselves are extremely new to the equation.
3. The United States Government and millions of adherents believe sincerely in the efficacy of these vaccines despite no long term evidence supporting these beliefs. In United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78, 64 S. Ct. 882, 88 L. Ed. 1148 (1944) it was established that the sincerity of a persons beliefs was essential in determining what constitutes a religion. Therefore these beliefs in an ultimate reality of long term vaccine efficacy are just that beliefs albeit sincerely held ones. Ergo they are religious in nature.
4. The Establishment clause in the Bill of Rights states “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion”. It is time that this statement be used as it was meant. To reign in a tyrannical government from inflicting on its citizenry a state religion.
5. These mandates are not laws, however the fact that they are binding in as much as they threaten the individual’s livelihood and impinge on the citizenry’s rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, they are in fact laws albeit wholly unconstitutional. Webster’s defines law as “a binding custom or practice of a community : a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority” ref: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/laws

In conclusion the government has no right to impinge upon the civil liberties of its citizens and mandate, or decree, or create a law that forces its citizens to adopt a form of religion whether it involves a deity or not.