
In a bold attack on religious freedom, the ACLU has filed a lawsuit challenging West Virginia Governor Patrick Morrisey’s executive order that allows families to claim religious exemptions from mandatory school vaccinations.
Key Takeaways
- The ACLU and Mountain State Justice have sued to block Governor Morrisey’s executive order permitting religious exemptions for school vaccination requirements.
- Prior to this order, West Virginia was one of only five states that didn’t allow religious or philosophical exemptions to vaccination mandates.
- Governor Morrisey argues the previous policy “substantially burdens the free exercise of religion” guaranteed by both U.S. and West Virginia constitutions.
- The lawsuit claims the governor overstepped his authority by effectively overriding laws that only permit medical exemptions approved by a doctor.
- The case represents a critical battle between religious liberty protections and government public health mandates.
Left-Wing Groups Attack Religious Freedom Protections
The ACLU of West Virginia and Mountain State Justice have launched a legal assault against Governor Patrick Morrisey’s executive order that finally permits West Virginia families to exercise their religious beliefs regarding vaccinations. The lawsuit, filed in Kanawha County Circuit Court and assigned to Judge Kenneth Ballard, aims to force all West Virginia schoolchildren to receive vaccinations regardless of their families’ sincere religious objections. This represents yet another example of progressive organizations working to limit religious freedom when it conflicts with their preferred government mandates.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of two parents – Dr. Joshua Hess, a pediatric hematologist and oncologist with an immunocompromised child, and Marisa Jackson, who also has a child susceptible to illness. Both plaintiffs have actively opposed religious exemptions to vaccination requirements, with Jackson having previously lobbied against such exemptions when the Legislature considered them. The ACLU’s legal challenge specifically targets health officials and agencies tasked with implementing the governor’s directive.
Gov. Patrick Morrisey's executive order permitting religious exemptions for vaccines is being challenged in court. https://t.co/RtrxOilWuA
— Eyewitness News (@wchs8fox11) May 23, 2025
Governor Morrisey Defends Religious Liberty
Governor Morrisey’s executive order directed state health officials to allow religious exemptions if families sign a document stating their religious objections to vaccines. The governor has taken a firm stand for religious freedom, refusing to back down despite the lawsuit. His order was based on the Equal Protection for Religion Act passed in 2023, which prohibits state actions that burden religious exercise unless they serve a compelling government interest by the least restrictive means.
“substantially burdens the free exercise of religion in violation of the inherent religious liberties guaranteed by the Constitutions of the United States and West Virginia,” said Patrick Morrisey Governor of West Virginia.
The governor has remained steadfast in his commitment to protecting religious liberties in the face of this challenge. He emphasized that his directive will ensure that students with sincere religious objections to vaccination are not denied access to public education. Prior to this order, West Virginia was among only five states nationwide that did not allow any non-medical exemptions to vaccination requirements, forcing families to either violate their religious beliefs or forfeit their children’s right to public education.
Why is the ACLU suing over vaccine exemptions—and is it really just about executive power? The latest legal clash in West Virginia blends politics, religion, and public health. Read what’s behind the lawsuit:https://t.co/dCoMCavPHF
— Religious Liberty – ReligiousLiberty.TV (@RelLibertyTV) May 24, 2025
ACLU Claims Legislative Authority Supersedes Religious Freedom
The ACLU’s lawsuit argues that state law only permits medical exemptions that require a doctor’s certification of a contraindication to vaccines. Their central claim is that the governor lacks authority to unilaterally override legislative acts, even when those acts potentially violate constitutional religious protections. The ACLU is essentially arguing that bureaucratic procedure trumps fundamental constitutional rights in this case.
“Governors do not rule by decree,” said Aubrey Sparks, ACLU-WV Legal Director.
The lawsuit also reveals the selective enforcement of constitutional principles by the ACLU. While the organization frequently challenges government actions as unconstitutional in other contexts, here they argue that the governor cannot act to protect constitutional religious freedoms without explicit legislative approval. West Virginia law currently mandates vaccination against several diseases for school attendance, including diphtheria, polio, measles, and hepatitis B, with no consideration for religious objections.
Battle Between Religious Freedom and Government Mandates Continues
This case highlights the ongoing tension between religious liberty protections and government public health mandates. While vaccine advocates argue that high immunization rates protect vulnerable populations through herd immunity, religious freedom advocates point out that forcing families to violate their sincere religious beliefs to access public education represents an unconstitutional burden on religious exercise. The Equal Protection for Religion Act was specifically designed to address such conflicts.
“ensure that the religious rights of public-school students are protected and that those students are not denied access to public education because of their religious objections to compulsory vaccination,” said Patrick Morrisey, Governor of West Virginia.
The West Virginia Legislature previously rejected a bill that would have allowed broader philosophical exemptions to vaccine requirements, but Governor Morrisey’s order is specifically focused on religious exemptions protected by both state and federal constitutions. As the case moves through the courts, it will test whether state vaccination policies must accommodate religious beliefs or whether the government can force families to violate their faith to access public services that their tax dollars fund.