Three parents who believe they should not “elevate a man-made vaccine over God’s perfect design” have won the first round of a court case focused on the interaction between compulsory school vaccination laws and religious liberties.
Raleigh County Judge Michael Froble granted a preliminary injunction for the families seeking religious exemptions to West Virginia public school vaccinations requirements.
“The court believes the compulsory vaccination law is not valid without a religious exemption — that the constitutional law and constitutional review indicate that statute itself is not constitutional, is invalid without a religious exemption,” Froble said in announcing his ruling.
Many legal questions remain in the broad sense. The judge has not yet decided on a permanent injunction, a question that would be examined more thoroughly in the courtroom, possibly a month or more from now.
It is possible that the attorneys in the case would take some questions to the state Supreme Court.
And the state board of education, which continues to stand behind the state’s school vaccination law that does not explicitly allow for religious exemptions, underscored in a statement that the judge’s ruling applies only to the three families who sued.
“This injunction is limited in scope and applies only to those named in this lawsuit. It will have no impact on other students in Raleigh County or throughout the state,” the state board said.
West Virginia students entering school for the first time must show proof of immunization against diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, and hepatitis B unless properly medically exempted.
The plaintiffs in the case sued under West Virginia’s “Equal Protection for Religion Act,” which went into law in 2023. Gov. Patrick Morrisey has expressed support for their lawsuit, and his administration is filing a friend of the court brief saying so.
The policy lays out the ability of individuals who believe their religious rights have been violated to seek a claim in court. The law says no state action may burden an individual’s exercise of religion unless it’s essential to furthering a compelling governmental interest and is the least restrictive means of achieving that.
The lawsuit in Raleigh County contends the state’s policies are not the least restrictive means of ensuring protection from communicable disease.
The governor earlier this year issued a directive for families wanting to pursue a religious exemption to send basic information to VaccineExemption@wv.gov, which is monitored by the state Bureau for Public Health — although that process doesn’t actually involve stating applicable religious beliefs.
Objections of the parents
The original plaintiff is Miranda Guzman, described in the lawsuit as a widow trying to enroll her 4-year-old daughter in public school.
The lawsuit says Guzman, a registered nurse, believes “she must not tinker with” her daughter’s “God-given natural immune system.”
That extends to only seeking medical attention when she or her daughter are sick “and additionally, only in cases where, after focused prayer, she is certain their God-given immune systems are incapable of eliminating that sickness without assistance. To do otherwise would be to violate her religious beliefs and faith in God.”
Guzman sought guidance from the Holy Spirit through prayer, according to the filing, and gained what she is certain is firm direction from the Holy Spirit that she must not vaccinate” her daughter. Her position is based on her opposition to abortion and a connection between vaccines and fetal cells.
The American Academy of Pediatrics maintains that vaccines do not contain fetal cells:
“Some vaccines involve growing viruses in human cell cultures originally developed from two aborted fetuses in the 1960s. These cell lines are still going, so no new aborted fetuses are ever needed. Purification processes filter the vaccine during production, and no fetal tissue remains.”
The other plaintiffs who joined the case more recently also described the basis for their religious concerns about school vaccination requirements.
Amanda Tolley, a teachers aide in Raleigh County, is seeking exceptions to the meningococcal booster vaccine required for entering 12th grade on behalf of her 17-year-old twin children.
Like Guzman, she objects to the use of aborted fetal cells in vaccine development. Moreover, according to the filing, Tolley believes she must not alter her children’s immune systems, which she refers to as “God’s Divine DNA.”
“And through prayer she does not believe that God wants her to vaccinate her children with the required booster vaccine.”
Carley Hunter, a Daniels resident and non-denominational Christian, is also seeking an exemption for her 17-year-old child for the meningococcal booster vaccine. She objects to vaccines because they are “man-made and not of God”
She believes the required booster vaccine for her child to enter 12th grade is spiritually impure and that injecting it into the high school senior would interfere with God’s superior design of the human body, according to the lawsuit.
“In short, they want their children to be able to take advantage of being able to attend school. And you know, that’s a guaranteed fundamental rights under the West Virginia constitution,” Chris Wiest, an attorney representing the parents, said on MetroNews’ “Talkline.”
“They’ve got sincerely held beliefs against vaccination.”
Wiest, whose law practice is based in Kentucky, is involved in a range of similar cases, including one in federal court in West Virginia where parents are suing about vaccine requirements on constitutional grounds.
He earlier represented some members of Congress, including Thomas Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene, in a lawsuit over a covid-era mask mandate in the House of Representatives.
Wiest has been involved in Kentucky cases about students and the chicken pox vaccine as well as “buffer zone” laws outside abortion facilities and state policies on “conversion therapy.”
“I do a lot of religious liberty litigation,” Wiest said on Talkline. “The court always can determine whether somebody is sincere. Courts are not allowed to judge, you know, whether it’s logical, consistent, whether it makes sense.
“I mean, if you believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster — and I joke about that, but if that’s your belief and it’s sincere, courts can’t judge that. But they can determine whether or not you’re telling the truth, and courts make that determination all the time.”
Advocates for vaccines
West Virginia health advocates have kept a close eye on the court case, urging the state to maintain its school vaccination standards.
Sissy Price, a registered nurse, was in the Raleigh County courtroom last week and said the stakes are serious. She characterized those as freedoms — for immunocompromised children, for new parents, for pregnant teachers and grandparents raising youngsters to live life without being exposed to disease outbreaks.
“West Virginia has strong, effective immunization code, keeping children safe,” Price said.
Jessie Ice, co-director of West Virginia Families for Immunizations, was also in the courtroom. She said the compelling interest for society “is to provide a safe learning environment for all children. Going to school is a place where people should be protected, they should be safe, especially when it comes to preventable disease.”
Dr. Joseph Golden, a semi-retired family practice physician in Raleigh County, said from the courtroom that he is concerned about the outcome of this public policy debate.
“Back before we had vaccines, children would die from communicable diseases such as diphtheria, such as polio, such as various types of meningitis — all of which can be lessened and hopefully prevented by appropriate vaccine implementation and administration,” he said.