by your NEWS Media Newsroom | Jun 26, 2024
The Supreme Court has declined to hear a case challenging Connecticut’s 2021 law that eliminated religious exemptions for childhood vaccine requirements.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review a challenge to a Connecticut law that eliminated religious exemptions for childhood vaccination requirements, upholding a lower court ruling that found the law constitutional. The justices provided no comment on their decision.
Enacted in 2021, the law removed religious exemptions for schoolchildren and daycare attendees, while maintaining medical exemptions. Children who had previously been granted religious exemptions were allowed to retain them.
Shortly after the law’s enactment, parents filed a lawsuit claiming it violated their constitutional rights, including the First Amendment right to free exercise of religion. In 2022, U.S. District Judge Janet Bond Arterton dismissed the lawsuit, citing Supreme Court precedent that vaccine mandates do not infringe on free exercise rights. Judge Arterton ruled that the law is constitutionally valid as it is “rationally related to a legitimate state purpose.”
In 2023, a panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld Judge Arterton’s decision in a 2-1 ruling. Circuit Judge Denny Chin, writing for the majority, noted that no court had previously found a constitutional defect in a state’s vaccination mandate due to the absence or repeal of a religious exemption. In partial dissent, Circuit Judge Joseph Bianco argued that the plaintiffs presented a plausible constitutional claim and questioned Connecticut’s rationale given that most states permit religious exemptions while maintaining public health.
The petition to the Supreme Court, submitted by lawyers for the Connecticut parents, contended that the appeals court’s decision undermined the First Amendment’s protections for religious exercise. They called for the Supreme Court to establish a standard for evaluating vaccine mandate exemptions that better safeguards religious diversity.
Connecticut Attorney General William Tong welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision not to intervene, stating that the ruling affirms the state legislature’s authority to protect public health. Tong emphasized that the law was enacted to prevent the spread of preventable diseases and protect the health of Connecticut families.
We the Patriots USA, which supported the lawsuit, expressed disappointment but noted that another aspect of the case—whether children with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) are entitled to education regardless of vaccination status—is still pending. A favorable ruling could ensure that children with disabilities receive necessary educational support services.
Additionally, a separate case arguing that private religious schools should be allowed to offer religious exemptions to vaccine mandates continues to progress through the courts.
NarrowPathMinistries 