This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

A. Marisa Chun

| May 19, 2021

May 19, 2021

A. Marisa Chun

See more on A. Marisa Chun

Crowell & Moring LLP

A. Marisa Chun

As a first chair trial lawyer, an appellate advocate and a white collar defense partner, Chun works for leading state, national and global clients. She was formerly deputy associate attorney general, a civil rights lawyer and a federal prosecutor at the U.S. Department of Justice.

“Serving at the Department of Justice taught me valuable lessons about how to help clients navigate high-profile or sensitive litigation and investigations involving public policy, multiple stakeholders and media scrutiny,” she said.

When Covid-19 cases threatened to converge with flu season, then-University of California President Janet Napolitano sought to protect the UC community and conserve critical hospital resources by requiring flu shots by Nov. 1, 2020, for all UC students, employees and faculty who studied, worked or lived on campus, subject to certain exceptions. Some of those affected challenged Napolitano’s order, and Chun moved swiftly and effectively to block the plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction request. Kiel v. The Regents of the University of California, HG20-072843 (Alameda Co. Super. Ct., filed Aug. 27, 2020).

Working within a condensed timeline, Chun and her Crowell team argued that UC’s flu vaccine requirement was constitutional because there was a real and substantial relationship between the mandate and public health concerns. She also contested the plaintiffs’ standing to sue.

Alameda County Superior Court Judge Richard L. Seabolt agreed. Following Chun’s detailed arguments at a lengthy hearing, on Dec. 4, he rejected an injunction, holding that the balance of harms tipped toward a finding that the vaccine policy was likely to be constitutional and that the plaintiffs had not shown that they were subject to the order due to their ongoing remote work and distance learning off campus.

The ruling could influence future Covid-19 vaccine mandate controversies. “I’ve been asked to speak on that question,” Chun said. “The legal principles here might have a relationship to vaccines in general. This was a timely and important case. UC is not just the world’s leading public research university, it’s a leading health care provider in California with a real need to protect its hospital resources, especially during the pandemic.”

— John Roemer

#362716

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com