Lawsuit filed against California's mandatory vaccine law SB 277

hlat

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
https://www.sott.net/article/321391-Lawsuit-filed-against-Californias-mandatory-vaccine-law-SB-277
Lawsuit filed against California's mandatory vaccine law SB 277

The article discusses a lawsuit filed in federal court, in the Southern District of California. There was at least one earlier lawsuit, in California state court. I looked up the status of the California state court case, and not much has happened. I think the lawsuit filed in federal court has a higher likelihood of succeeding, based on the increased sophistication of both the attorneys and nonprofit plaintiffs like the Weston Price Foundation.

California state court case
_http://www.lacourt.org/casesummary/ui/casesummary.aspx?
Case Number: BC617766
TAMARA BUCK ET AL VS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Filing Date: 04/22/2016
...
Documents Filed (Filing dates listed in descending order)
06/06/2016 Stipulation and Order (to extend time to respond to complaint - granted )
Filed by Attorney for Deft/Respnt

05/09/2016 Summons Filed (for Plaintiffs Tamara Buck et al. )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

04/22/2016 Complaint (for Plaintiffs Tamara Buck et al. )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

I do not see why the plaintiff's attorney in the state court case would agree to allow the defendant, California, extra time to file a response. I think any extra time puts the kids at a disadvantage because that delays the court from blocking the vaccine law. I think it also looks bad that a nonprofit is giving most of its money to the plaintiff's attorney for the state court case, because critics can argue that the plaintiff's attorney is basically using a controversy and one nonprofit to generate money for himself.

_http://www.revoltrevokerestore.com/faq.html
Where will the funds will go?

​Nearly 100% of all funds raised will be used to pay our lawyer. Facebook advertising fees up to $1,000, and small administrative fees such as EVoice, website hosting, etc. may be deducted from the fund.
 
In the federal case, there could potentially be good news next week if the judge issues a preliminary injunction against the vaccine law.

_http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/education/article95850072.html
August 15, 2016 5:17 PM
Opponents try to block California vaccination law as school starts

As Sacramento area school districts step up efforts to ensure that kindergartners and seventh graders get vaccinated so they can attend class, a federal judge in San Diego is weighing whether to temporarily block the law that eliminated parents’ ability to exempt their children from shots by citing personal beliefs.

Rebecca Estepp, spokeswoman for the nonprofit Education 4 All Foundation, said U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw announced he expects to decide the week of Aug. 22 whether to temporarily halt Senate Bill 277 while a lawsuit goes forward. The foundation is one of 21 plaintiffs in the suit.

Last week, scores of students missed the opening days of classes in the Sacramento region because they showed up without their proof of vaccinations. A number of large districts have yet to start fall classes. San Juan Unified starts its fall semester on Thursday and Sacramento City Unified starts classes Sept. 1.

Gov. Jerry Brown last year signed SB 277 by Sen. Richard Pan, D-Sacramento, making California the third state in the nation that eliminated religious and personal belief exemptions for vaccination requirements. The law took effect July 1. Opponents said the law violated parental rights and deprived their children of their constitutional right to an education.

The new law requires students entering the two checkpoint years of kindergarten and seventh grade to show proof of vaccination as a condition of attending class. The requirement also applies to children in day care and students who transfer into a district.

The federal lawsuit names the state of California and its departments of Education and Public Health, among others. It complains that the plaintiffs, 17 individuals and four nonprofit organizations, have suffered severe and irreparable injury under the law in that it violates state and federal constitutional protections of due process. Tests show that the son of the lead plaintiff, Ana Whitlow, for example, has already developed an immunity to three diseases, pertussis (whooping cough), diphtheria and tetanus. Nevertheless, the boy’s school has refused to enroll him in the seventh grade unless he receives the required vaccine, the suit said.

The lawsuit said that while the Legislature exempted special needs or disabled students – those with individualized education plans – from the requirements, some California school districts still are refusing to allow those students to remain in school, taking the position that the law’s language lacks clarity.

The California Department of Education issued a statement saying it could not comment on ongoing litigation. But state Superintendent Tom Torlakson said vaccinating students “is the law, and it’s the right thing to do for public health.”

The Sacramento City Unified School District earlier this month worked with WellSpace Health in offering immunization clinics to students. It has a series of additional free clinics at its district enrollment center in south Sacramento through Sept. 8. The district also is reaching out to individual families whose children, according to school records, do not have current immunizations, said spokesman Gabe Ross.

Ross said regardless of the court’s decision, no contingency plans should be necessary. “We would still encourage all families to get students vaccinated, just like we did before the law,” he said.

Classes began last Tuesday for thousands of students at Elk Grove Unified and Folsom Cordova Unified. This week, officials for both districts said they are tracking the numbers of students out of school because they lack immunizations. Neither had immediate updates Monday based on that tracking.

At Elk Grove, spokeswoman Xanthi Pinkerton on Friday said that the district had identified 133 seventh-graders or kindergartners who lacked proof of immunization required to attend school, out of about 10,000 in the two grade levels. At Folsom Cordova, spokesman Daniel Thigpen last week said 98 students remained out of class on the fourth day of school – 37 in kindergarten and 61 in seventh grade.

Natomas Unified spokesman Jim Sanders said the school district’s extensive outreach through the summer meant that no students were sent home last Wednesday, the first day of Natomas classes, for lack of a vaccination.

Immunizations have been required in California schools since 1962, starting with the polio vaccine, according to the California Department of Public Health. A measles outbreak tied to a case at Disneyland in 2015 prompted lawmakers to impose the stricter requirements.

Pan said Monday that Disneyland has had previous measles outbreaks since it is an international destination. Measles spread from the park last year, he said, “because of pockets of low immunizations.”

“It’s important that we start working this year to restore community immunity,” he said.
 
A big black mark on Jerry Brown, for sure.

In situations like this, it's kind of necessary to do it through the court. I hope that the attys are at least working at half price like our atty does for us.
 
Looks like they weren't able to issue an injunction before school started in Oakland. Hundreds of children were sent home after they showed up to school without vaccination papers:

https://www.sott.net/article/326120-Hundreds-of-school-children-sent-home-in-California-due-to-new-vaccination-law

Scores of California students may be sent home on their first day of school because of a new vaccine law that took effect this year.

The new state law took effect July 1. Now, parents can no longer use personal or religious beliefs as a reason not to have their kids immunized. This school year, kindergartners and seventh graders must show proof of immunizations.

Monday WAS the first day of school for kids in Oakland. Hundreds of them were expected to be sent home.

"There could be a few hundred kids that are not immunized and so we'll be encouraging them as quickly as possible to get out there," said Oakland Unified School District John Sasaki. "Their parents may try to drop them off and we'll have to turn them away."

Young children who got their personal belief exemptions approved before January 2016, will be grandfathered in. According to the new law, they still must get immunized when they reach seventh grade.
 
Hard to believe this is happening here in California.

20 some years ago the majority Democrat politicos would have not pushed for something like this. Back then, it was the conservatives who were courted by Big Pharma, with their constituents the most vocal against those durn, unvaccinated immigrants who were bringing death and disease to school youngsters.

I asked a homeschooling lady from my former Christian church who I knew was monitoring the fight against SB 277 what she thought about the lawyers and persons behind the challenge. Looks like the coalition formed to fight the CA Governor and this draconian mandatory vaccine law is a combination of left-wing and right-wing lawyers, homeschoolers and more liberal alternative health providers. She was surprised to find out how nice and informative some of those liberals and their health nuts practitioners are. ;D

Added: The reason the homeschoolers are in on this fight is they think it won't be long before the government comes after their kids, using the excuse that the parents are unfit and endangering their child due to not being vaccinated.
 
I think the smart play at the moment for the parents of California children entering kindergarten and 7th grade is to get a medical exemption from a doctor, and not wait for the court case. The vaccine check is supposed to be only for incoming kindergartners and 7th graders, so there's not supposed to be a check for the other grades.

There may be a silver lining to the current vaccine law. I'm guessing that the law won't be amended while the court case goes on, and the court case will probably go for several years. So I'm guessing the status quo of a medical exemption will not be disturbed for these several years. The law can always get worse, and that would be an amendment that eliminates the medical exemption.
 
No injunction from the judge.

_http://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article98180712.html
August 26, 2016 4:37 PM
Judge won't block California's strict child vaccination law
By JULIE WATSON Associated Press
SAN DIEGO —

A federal judge will not immediately block a California law that requires all schoolchildren to be vaccinated and is one of the strictest in the nation for eliminating exemptions based on religious and personal beliefs.

The ruling Friday by U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw in San Diego comes as the law faces its first test with the end of summer break.

A lawsuit filed by 17 families and two foundations sought an injunction while the lawsuit works its way through the courts. The law went into effect July 1 and eliminated religious and personal beliefs as reasons for opting out of the state's mandatory immunizations.

It requires all children to be vaccinated before attending private or public schools or day care facilities unless doctors determine medical reasons for not doing so.

Sabraw wrote in his ruling that "case law makes clear that states may impose mandatory vaccination requirements without providing for religious or conscientious objections."

He also noted it was not the court's place to decide on the "wisdom" of the Legislature.

Attorney Jim Turner, representing the plaintiffs, said their children will not be allowed to attend school except for home schooling while the suit proceeds.

"The lawsuit could carry on for a period time, probably a year or two," he said.

Turner said his team was still analyzing the ruling and declined to comment further.

Parents have argued that the law violated a child's constitutional right to an education. Those who sued pointed out that 47 states allow either a religious or personal belief exemption from school vaccination mandates.

The judge wrote in his ruling that the right to an education is no more sacred than the right for a state to protect "the health and safety of its citizens, and particularly, schoolchildren."

Lawmakers passed the legislation after a measles outbreak at Disneyland in December 2014. The outbreak sickened 147 people in the U.S., mostly in California. Under the law, kindergartners and seventh-graders must show proof of having received the government's recommended set of vaccinations.

The state's legal team said the plaintiffs' claims disregard decades of scientific data and that the legislation was passed in response to a health emergency.

California "became the epicenter of a measles outbreak which was the result of unvaccinated individuals infecting vulnerable individuals, including children who are unable to receive vaccinations due to health conditions or age requirements," the lawyers said.

The plaintiffs said that since 1961, the state has dramatically increased the number of vaccines it requires for children. They also say school districts have denied admission to children with medical exemptions.

The law's opponents are skeptical that the risk of an adverse reaction to vaccines is minimal.
 
Back
Top Bottom