A Very Short Response to the 11 Reasons Thing Circulating on FB Vaccine Aware Pages

A Very Short Response to the 11 Reasons Thing Circulating on FB Vaccine Aware Pages

Many people have asked me to comment on a post raising 11 reasons (I think that’s the number) why SB 276 is illegal. I glanced at it quickly. Although I acknowledge and appreciate the effort, most or all of the points and discussion is recyled from arguments raised and rejected in prior court cases.

There were at least four challenges to SB 277 in state and federal courts, all of which were rejected. The lawyers who challenged SB 277 were smart, articulate, wrote very good papers and raised every conceivable issue, and they all lost. Here are three of the SB 277 decisions.

Whitlow v. California, 203 F.Supp.3d 1079 (S.D. Cal., 2016)

Love v. State Dep’t of Educ., 29 Cal.App.5th 980, 240 Cal.Rptr.3d 861 (Cal. App., 2018)

philipscase

Here is a family law case in which the religious right to oppose mandatory vaccination was rejected. Price v. Price (In re Marriage of Price) (Cal. App., 2019)

Here is a West Virginia federal case which you should read because it involves a physician written medical exemption rejected by school authorities.
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Unpublished/092352.U.pdf
(Spoiler alert: The court of appeals upheld the rejection, and rejected the religious argument as well). This case will be cited and discussed in detail by the Attorney General’s Office in every forthcoming SB 276 legal challenge.

If you read these decisions, you will get a better understanding of the law and how judges think (primarily relying on the limbic parts of their brains). Caution, it will depress and/or anger you.

I have addressed the discrimination argument against mandatory vaccination in a prior post. Here it is: http://rickjaffeesq.com/2019/05/24/sorry-cali-vaccine-concerned-but-i-dont-think-medical-discrimination-is-a-valid-basis-to-challenge-sb-276/
The short of it is that it’s a non-starter.

Neither HIPAA nor FERPA provide a private right of action for a state government agencies violation of these federal statutorily created rights.

While it is true that appellate courts sometimes change the law, for reasons which I stated many times, in the vaccine context, it is really an uphill battle.

That being said, SB 276 involves medical exemptions, not personal belief and religious exemptions. To me that means that a successful challenge cannot focus on the usual suspects, i.e., claims like substantive due process, education rights, religious choice, medical freedom, but something different. So, keep up the thinking and interacting about these issues, and maybe one of you will come up with something that might work.

Rick Jaffe, Esq.
rickjaffeesquire@gmail.com

9 thoughts on “A Very Short Response to the 11 Reasons Thing Circulating on FB Vaccine Aware Pages

  1. Jacobson v Mass also stated: “that the police power of a state, whether exercised directly by the legislature, or by a local body acting under its authority, may be exerted in such circumstances, or by regulations so arbitrary and oppressive in particular cases, as to justify the interference of the courts to prevent wrong and oppression… ‘All laws,’ this court has said, ‘should receive a sensible construction. General terms should be so limited in their application as not to lead to injustice, oppression, or an absurd consequence.”

    At what point do we start challenging mandatory vaccines under these parameters? NY is attempting to mandate a cancer vaccine (HPV). Do we have any rights to claim these vaccine mandates have become absurd?

    1. individuals cannot sue the state or local government for violating HIPAA or FERPA. There is no private right or cause of action. Only the federal government can take action, in FERPA’s case the theoretical remedy is federal defunding of the school, but that has never happened. Only thing that happens is the violater gets a letter about the violation.

  2. individuals cannot sue the state or local government for violating HIPAA or FERPA. There is no private right or cause of action. Only the federal government can take action, in FERPA’s case the theoretical remedy is federal defunding of the school, but that has never happened. Only thing that happens is the violater gets a letter about the violation.

  3. What about the points used against the Santa Barbara pilot program? It was found illegal based on medical privacy rights and this is basically a statewide extension of that.

Leave a Reply to Richard Jaffe Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.