SAN DIEGO (Legal Newsline) - San Diego can’t impose a Covid vaccine mandate on students because state law governs which vaccinations are required to attend public school, an appeals court ruled, rejecting arguments officials had to act to protect students and the school district from liability.
Let Them Choose and a 16-year-old identified as S.V. sued the San Diego Unified School District adopted a “Vaccination Roadmap” in September 2021 requiring students 16 and older to be vaccinated against Covid-19 to attend in-person classes or participate in sports and other extracurricular activities. The Roadmap recognized medical, but not religious or personal exceptions.
A trial court ruled the immunization mandate was preempted by state law, saying state health authorities had “fully occupied the field” and there was no room for local officials “to do something inconsistent with the statewide standard.” The school district appealed, but California’s Fourth Appellate District upheld the ruling in a Nov. 22 decision, saying “in a nutshell, local variations must give way to a uniform state standard.”
San Diego suspended implementation of the mandate until 2023 during the appeals process and then argued that made the cases moot. But the appeals court disagreed, saying “merely postponing (as distinguished from cancelling) the vaccination mandate does not impact this court’s ability to render effective relief.”
“In any event, we would exercise our discretion to decide the consolidated appeals because they present issues of broad public interest that are likely to recur,” the court ruled.
Since a smallpox epidemic in 2011, the California Supreme Court has held that schools can require vaccinations for diseases the state Legislature dictates. Current law requires students to be vaccinated against 10 diseases including polio, diphtheria, tetanus, measles, mumps and rubella. The law has been repeatedly amended and updated and in 2015 lawmakers eliminated the exception for personal beliefs.
The law was amended in 1979 and the Department of Public Health followed with a regulation stating students who have received the required immunizations “shall be admitted without condition as a pupil.” The Legislature further wrote into the law a mechanism for adding new vaccinations to the list that requires the DPH to consult various authorities but not school districts.
“Given the scope of the state statutes, school districts have no remaining discretion in these matters,” the court concluded.
The school district also argued it needed to restrict unvaccinated students because of its “special relationship” with students, which has led courts to impose liability on school districts for other risks they encounter. But the appeals court said “we are not persuaded that the policies that have led to recognizing a tort duty to prevent personal injury extend to compelled vaccination, which is essentially a medical decision.”