Arizona Tribune - Physicians for Informed Consent Files Amicus Brief with U.S. Supreme Court to Protect Religious Freedom for Virtual Public School Students

NEWPORT BEACH, CA / ACCESS Newswire / October 14, 2026 / Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit educational organization, has filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a family's religious-freedom claims in Perry v. Marteney (No. 26-319).

The case concerns a child who was disenrolled from a virtual public school in West Virginia because she was not fully vaccinated, despite receiving her education online. Although the state exempts children who are homeschooled or attend microschools or learning pods from school vaccination requirements, it does not provide a comparable religious exemption for students attending public school virtually. The Perrys object to further vaccination based on their sincerely held religious beliefs, and their daughter is missing only one dose of the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine and one dose of the varicella (chickenpox) vaccine.

The case has implications beyond the family and the state in which it arises. Only five states nationwide, California, Connecticut, Maine, New York, and West Virginia, do not permit religious exemptions to school vaccination requirements. The dispute raises important constitutional questions about whether states may accommodate certain secular educational arrangements while denying religious exemptions to families whose children receive comparable instruction at home.

A federal district court initially allowed the child to continue attending virtual public school while the case proceeded, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed that decision. PIC's amicus brief argues that the appeals court did not apply the rigorous constitutional review required by Supreme Court precedent. Specifically, the brief challenges the court's treatment of the Perrys' enrollment in virtual public school as an unrelated secular choice, despite the role of the state's vaccination requirement in limiting their educational options due to their religious beliefs.

"Parents should not have to choose between their sincerely held religious beliefs related to their children's health and their children's access to public education, whether in-person or online," said Shira Miller, M.D., founder and president of PIC.

The brief further addresses principles of informed consent ethics and presents PIC's analysis of vaccine risks and disease risks, drawing on PIC's 2025 reference work, Vaccines and the Diseases They Target: An Analysis of Vaccine Safety and Epidemiology (the Silver Booklet), which includes over 400 references to scientific and government sources, including CDC and FDA data and peer-reviewed studies. Based on its review of the available scientific literature, PIC contends that the comparative safety evidence does not conclusively establish that MMR and varicella vaccines are safer than the diseases they target for normal-risk children, and identifies areas of scientific uncertainty relevant to informed medical decision-making.

Prepared and filed on PIC's behalf by Gene C. Schaerr, Hannah C. Smith, and Joshua J. Prince of Schaerr | Jaffe LLP, the amicus brief urges the Supreme Court to grant review and clarify the constitutional protections applicable when states permit secular exemptions to vaccination requirements while denying religious exemptions.

About Physicians for Informed Consent

Founded in 2015, Physicians for Informed Consent is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit educational organization that unites doctors who support health freedom in vaccination and educates the public about disease risks versus vaccine risks. physiciansforinformedconsent.org

Press Contact
PIC Media
805-364-2388

SOURCE: Physicians for Informed Consent

View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire

S.Jackson--AT