California mom appeals to Supreme Court in religious-based vaccine dispute after son is banned from school

A California mother has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in a dispute over California's vaccine requirements for public school attendance, arguing that the state is forcing her to choose between her Christian faith and her son's education. The family says the boy was barred from public school in January after the district phased out a personal beliefs exemption and rejected her attempt to use alternative immunization methods.

The emergency application, filed Sept. 11 and formally docketed Friday, was submitted to Justice Elena Kagan, who handles emergency matters from the 9th Circuit. The filing, brought by We the Patriots USA, Inc. and "Jane Doe," contends that California's health code unconstitutionally bars her son from attending school unless he receives vaccines she says are religiously objectionable. Doe argues the vaccines are linked to abortion through cells used in development and testing, and that her faith requires her to keep her and her son's bodies pure as "the temple of the Holy Spirit." According to the application, her son had attended public school under a personal beliefs exemption until California had phased those out. When she pursued alternative immunization methods, Ventura Unified School District initially accepted them, only to later reject them and bar her son from classes in January. In May, prosecutors issued Doe a criminal citation for truancy, though the case was later dropped. Once an honor roll student, her son is now failing academically, according to the filing, and struggles socially after being kept out of school for months.

Doe’s attorneys argue the law violates the First Amendment’s free exercise clause, pointing to recent precedent that recognizes parents’ rights to direct their children’s religious upbringing. They contend California permits medical exemptions that pose the same public health risks as religious exemptions would, making the law discriminatory against people of faith. "The First Amendment does not permit California to exile children from public school because their parents seek to raise them in accordance with their religious beliefs," the filing states. The brief warns that, without relief, the unnamed teen risks missing his education entirely or being forced to choose between "obeying God and sacrificing their children’s futures, or caving to the state and sacrificing their souls and their children’s sanctity." Protesters opposing vaccine mandates gather at the Capitol in Sacramento, Calif., Sept. 8, 2021. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, File)

Justice Kagan may call for a response from California officials or refer the application to the full court for consideration. The mother is asking the justices to issue an injunction allowing her son to return to school while the broader case plays out in the lower courts. Her lawyers also warn that unless the court steps in, families like hers may be forced to "literally flee California" to practice their faith, something the brief says the First Amendment was designed to prevent.

The case comes amid ongoing national debates over vaccine mandates, religious liberty and parental rights under the Trump administration. The filing follows the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor, which strengthened protections for parents directing their children’s religious upbringing.

The California mother, identifying as "Jane Doe," objects to vaccines that use aborted fetal cells on the basis of her Christian faith. The petition argues that the state’s approach effectively suppresses religious exercise while allowing medical exemptions that could entail similar public health considerations. The filing also notes that the son had maintained strong academic performance and social engagement prior to the dispute, and that the period of exclusion has contributed to academic and social setbacks.

The 9th Circuit’s handling of any emergency relief could determine whether the boy returns to class before the case moves through state and federal courts. If the high court declines to hear the matter on an emergency basis, the case will likely proceed through the California court system and potentially beyond, depending on later rulings. Advocates on both sides of the vaccine-mandate debate say the outcome could have broader implications for how religious-liberty claims intersect with public-health policy in schools.

The petition highlights a broader tension between public health objectives and parental religious rights, a debate that has intensified as states revisit exemptions and vaccination requirements for K–12 students. Supporters of strict vaccination policies argue exemptions create loopholes that undermine herd immunity and classroom safety, while opponents contend that religious beliefs deserve heightened protection when they directly affect a child’s access to education.

The case remains under review by Justice Kagan and the high court, with potential action expected in the coming weeks depending on the response from California and the court’s assessment of urgency. In the meantime, the family remains at the center of a national discussion about how to balance faith, parental rights and state public-health responsibilities in public schools.