Two significant issues are getting pushback in a high-profile Raleigh County case over religious exemptions to mandatory school vaccinations.
One is whether the local judge should send up a central question to the state Supreme Court: Does West Virginia’s religious freedoms law affect the state’s school vaccinations law, and if so then does the state have to offer exemptions?
On that one, lawyers for the Raleigh County school board agree that certifying a question is efficient, but they disagree with the specific question.
The second big issue is a motion to turn the Raleigh County case into a class action lawsuit, where the judge there could set a framework for judges across the state in similar cases of families seeking exemptions.
The motion for class certification was made by lawyers for families who want the school system to recognize religious exemptions. Lawyers on other sides of the case have now filed motions objecting.
The decision on those issues lies with Raleigh Circuit Judge Michael Froble, who is overseeing the ongoing local case. A permanent injunction hearing in Froble’s courtroom is scheduled to resume next week.
Whatever happens in the Raleigh County courtroom is likely to lead to a state Supreme Court review because a notice of intent to appeal is already on file. Gov. Patrick Morrisey, who supports religious exemptions, has pointed toward the Raleigh County case, and it has come up in other courtrooms.
So significant procedural questions posed of Judge Froble could send ripples across this issue affecting West Virginia politics, schoolhouses and courtrooms.
West Virginia’s attorney general, representing the state health department, last week asked Froble to send this question to the Supreme Court: “Whether the Equal Protection for Religion Act applies to West Virginia’s compulsory vaccination law and thus requires the State to offer religious and philosophical exemptions to vaccination.”
Lawyers representing the Raleigh County school board responded to say they don’t object to asking the Supreme Court a relevant question, but they say it should be a different one.
Those lawyers propose a narrower question focused solely on whether the religious freedoms law applies to the compulsory vaccines law. In other words, their proposal is to drop the second part of the original question.
The Raleigh County board attorneys object to the original phrasing for three reasons:
1. It presumes philosophy is protected under the Equal Protection for Religion Act.
2. It doesn’t address the degree to which the beliefs are held. The lawyers say that even if the religious freedoms act applies, a case-by-case analysis is necessary before any exemption is offered.
3. There’s no mention of an analysis of the societal interest in maintaining high vaccination levels and whether requiring vaccination for public school students is the least restrictive means of achieving that.
“Rather than assuming these important issues away, this Court should certify a question of whether ERPA applies to the CVL,” wrote the attorneys for the Raleigh County board.
“That is the more prudent course. If EPRA does not apply to the CVL, there are no other issues to decide in this case. If it does, evidence of an applicant’s sincerity, the State’s compelling interest, and narrow tailoring is at play.”
The other issue that could shape the Raleigh County case is possible class action status.
Lawyers for families suing over religious exemptions to school vaccination requirements asked for class action status in filings earlier this month.
Earlier testimony showed that applications for about 570 students seeking religious exemptions have been filed with the state Department of Health so far. The state Department of Education has not honored them, saying the compulsory vaccination law has no mention of religious exemptions.
“Statewide declaratory and injunctive relief on all of the issues of the EPRA is appropriate for class members who have been determined to have sincere religious objections to vaccination by the Department of Health or a court of competent jurisdiction,” the attorneys wrote in a motion filed this month.
“The practical effect of the relief here would be that this Court’s final order (if in favor of Plaintiffs) can be taken into any other Circuit Court in West Virginia, and a trial can be held on the limited issue of whether those plaintiffs possess a sincerely held religious belief contrary to vaccination as required by the CVL.”
The other parties in the case disagree.
The parties opposing class certification argue that the motion should be denied because the request doesn’t measure up to established standards.
Moreover, the opposing parties contend that class certification would be impractical because, they maintain, applying the religious freedoms law would require extensive individualized, fact-specific inquiries into the sincerity of religious beliefs.
Finally, the other lawyers maintain the Raleigh County judge lacks the authority to influence courtrooms in the rest of the state.
“Plaintiffs ask this Court to certify a statewide class and enjoin the activity of fifty-five school boards as to the Vaccine Law,” wrote lawyers for the state board.
“Yet this case is pending in the Circuit Court of Raleigh County and names only the West Virginia State Board of Education and the Raleigh County Board of Education (and officials thereof) as defendants.”
Lawyers for the state board continued by saying, “Plaintiffs’ motion fails because this Court has territorial jurisdiction to award injunctive relief only in Raleigh County, and it lacks jurisdiction to afford such relief outside of Raleigh County against entities who are not present in this case.”