On Friday, June 6, 2025, the Massachusetts Joint Committee on Public Health held its fourth hearing in four years on legislation seeking to eliminate the religious exemption to school vaccine requirements. Once again, the message from the public was unmistakable: we want our religious beliefs to be respected. Opposition to these bills is strong, widespread, and deeply rooted.
These bills would dramatically expand state control over student health decisions and override parental and religious rights. H2554 and S1557 seek to eliminate religious exemptions for K–12 students, stripping families of their freedom to make health decisions based on faith. S1618 grants the Department of Public Health full authority over vaccine exemptions, including in private religious schools, during a declared public health emergency. This same bill would also force schools to report vaccination data and could label schools as “elevated risk” if they do not meet state-imposed thresholds, punishing small religious and private schools for simply serving families with diverse medical needs or sincere religious convictions.
To read more about why we oppose these bills, you can read our brief HERE.
As of mid-afternoon on the day of the hearing, 59 of the 70 people who had testified were in opposition to the bills, consistent with the nearly 90% opposition seen in prior years. This overwhelming response underscores the deep concern that many Massachusetts families and medical professionals have regarding this discriminatory legislation.
Among those asking thoughtful and important questions were newly elected Representative Thurber and Senator Dooner, who stood out in the hearing for taking seriously the concerns raised by constituents. A recurring theme in testimony was the unfair targeting of a small religious minority. Currently, fewer than 1% of students claim a religious exemption, while over 16,000 students fall into what’s referred to as the “gap population”—students whose vaccination status is unreported. Eliminating the religious exemption, many noted, would have no impact on this much larger group. If the goal is truly public health, why focus on a small group exercising their religious conscience rights?
Several speakers pointed to the recent Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling in Care & Protection of Eve as a clear affirmation of religious liberty. In that decision, the Court held that even in cases of temporary custody, the government must meet strict scrutiny when infringing on parental religious rights. In making its ruling, the Court cited the amicus brief that MFI filed in support of religious freedom. This precedent directly challenges statements made by Rep. Andy Vargas during the hearing, who claimed “the courts have ruled” and that “the science is settled.” Notably, Rep. Vargas left before hearing most of the opposition testimony, and Rep. Marjorie Decker was absent for much of the session. One might think that, as the sponsors of these bills, they would want to hear people’s feedback on them.
While the strong turnout in defense of religious liberty at last week’s hearing was encouraging, the fight is far from over. No parent should be forced to choose between their child’s education and their deeply held religious beliefs.
Now is the time to take action. Contact your Massachusetts legislator today and urge them to stand up for parental rights and religious freedom in our Commonwealth. Your voice matters!
Help MFI keep up the crucial fight to protect religious liberty in the Commonwealth. Give a generous donation today!
Share this blog by clicking the icons below!
