A range of groups moved to weigh in on a high profile state Supreme Court case about religious exemptions to vaccines. They focus on how widespread vaccination affects public health, the validity of circuit court decisions and whether the governor unconstitutionally overreached through an executive order.
“This case presents a matter of exceptional constitutional importance,” wrote lawyers for one of the groups, the League of Women Voters of West Virginia.
An appeal is taking shape in the vaccine exemptions case that was before Raleigh Circuit Judge Michael Froble last year. The judge ruled in favor of families who want the public school system to accept religious exemptions processed by the state health department.
The case before Froble was originally brought by a couple of local families seeking to have religious exemptions recognized by public schools in the area, but the judge — partway through — certified a class action that would affect similar cases in other counties so the matter is now statewide in significance.
The conflict focuses on whether West Virginia’s religious freedoms law passed in 2023 directly affects the longstanding mandatory vaccinations law for the public school system.
The state Supreme Court has agreed to review the case, but no date for oral arguments has yet been set. Meanwhile, aspects of the case are evolving as various parties submit written positions.
Some of those are not direct parties to the case. Organizations moving so far to have their positions considered include the League of Women Voters, the Defense Trial Counsel of West Virginia, the Center for Rural Health Development, the West Virginia Hospital Association, the American Public Health Association and more.
The Defense Trial Counsel, which represents more than 400 civil defense attorneys in West Virginia, argued that several aspects of the way the circuit court conducted its exploration of the vaccine exemptions issue potentially erode courtroom standards.
“The circuit court’s certification of a statewide class without permitting discovery, its reliance on presumptions in lieu of an evidentiary record, and its incorporation of an executive order of doubtful constitutional validity into the class definition each pose significant risks,” wrote the Defense Trial Counsel.
The organization argues that a lower court improperly granted class certification to families challenging vaccine requirements without allowing for necessary discovery into the sincerity of their religious beliefs.
Froble wrote in a class certification order last yar, “These issues arise from the same statewide policy and can be resolved in this action for all class members.”
The defense attorneys claim the circuit judge skipped major steps before certifying the statewide class of 570 individuals citing personal religious beliefs to claim exemptions to the public school vaccination law.
“Having recognized that those determinations are inherently individualized, the circuit court nonetheless certified a class without permitting a single deposition, a single document request, or a single question probing whether any class member’s beliefs were in fact sincere or religious,” the defense lawyers wrote.
The defense attorneys organization also takes issue with the judge’s interpretation of an executive order by Gov. Patrick Morrisey, saying it overrides existing state statutes regarding compulsory vaccination.
West Virginia’s compulsory vaccination law means 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. There is no explicit exception on religious grounds.
The governor issued an executive order earlier last year linking the Equal Protection for Religion Act with the vaccine law.
The religious protections law gives citizens the right to sue if they believe their deeply held beliefs are being suppressed. But the law includes additional factors to weigh, including whether a compelling state interest exists to uphold a policy under the least restrictive means.
In a footnote, the defense attorneys group observed, “The EO directed the Bureau for Public Health to establish a process for religious or conscientious objections where ‘a writing signed by the objector shall be sufficient proof to establish the objection.’
“By adopting this administrative “check-the-box” standard as the factual predicate for a judicial class action, the circuit court effectively ruled that a person becomes a class member simply by saying they are one, bypassing any judicial inquiry into the sincerity or religious nature of the belief.”
The League of Women Voters of West Virginia argues that the governor’s executive order mandating religious exemptions for school vaccinations unconstitutionally infringes upon the separation of powers.
The organization contends that the governor overstepped his authority by unilaterally altering a long-standing state statute that only permits medical exemptions, especially after the Legislature repeatedly declined to explicitly add a religious exception.
“This case presents a straightforward constitutional violation. The Governor has, by executive order, created a religious exemption to a statute that expressly does not contain one. In doing so, the Governor has not executed the law, he has changed it,” wrote lawyers for the League of Women Voters.
The League of Women Voters emphasizes that allowing the executive branch to bypass the legislative process destabilizes the rule of law and creates a dangerous precedent for government administration.
“This case is therefore not merely about vaccination policy or religious accommodation,” they wrote. “It is about whether duly enacted laws remain binding unless and until they are amended or repealed by the Legislature itself. The answer to that question must be yes.”
Medical and public health organizations
Several public health entities filed together to have their positions considered.
They include the American Public Health Association, Infectious Diseases Society of America, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Physicians, Network for Public Health Law, Grandparents for Vaccines, Defend Public Health, Doctors for America, Alliance for Aging Research and 28 public health law and policy scholars.
Their submission argues that maintaining standardized vaccine requirements is the most effective and least restrictive method for ensuring population-level safety.
The groups aim to provide the court with scientific expertise about how vaccination mandates effectively prevent the spread ofinfectious diseases within the community. By participating in the case, these experts hope to highlight the real-world health consequences of judicial rulings on immunization policy.
“The matters asserted are directly relevant to the disposition of this case because the Court’s resolution will have significant implications for vaccination policy, the prevention of disease outbreaks, and the protection of public health, both in West Virginia and more broadly,” the groups say in the motion.
Center for Rural Health Development
The Center for Rural Health Development, the West Virginia Immunization Network and a broad coalition of medical organizations say their expert perspective is vital for the court to understand the public health risks associated with providing broad exceptions to mandatory vaccinations for students.
The organizations say that maintaining these mandates is essential for protecting children and the general public from preventable diseases.
The 12 cooperating groups in this filing include:
American Academy of Pediatrics – West Virginia Chapter
West Virginia Academy of Family Physicians
West Virginia Association of Local Health Departments
West Virginia Pharmacists Association
Association for Professionals in Infection Control & Epidemiology – West Virginia
West Virginia Rural Health Association
West Virginia State Medical Association
West Virginia Osteopathic Medical Association
West Virginia Association of School Nurses, Inc.
West Virginia Nurses Association
West Virginia Chapter of the American College of Osteopathic Family Physicians
West Virginians for Affordable Health Care
West Virginia Hospital Association
Representing dozens of healthcare facilities, the West Virginia Hospital Association maintains that allowing religious exemptions for school vaccines would significantly threaten public health and increase the spread of dangerous infectious diseases.
The organization notes that it serves the interests of three children’s hospitals in West Virginia: WVU Medicine Golisano Children’s Hospital; Marshall Health Network Hoops Family Children’s Hospital; and Vandalia Health CAMC Women and Children’s Hospital.