California’s SB-277 is the 2015 state vaccine law that eliminated the personal belief exemption for school and daycare enrollment. Signed on June 30, 2015, it requires every child attending a public or private school, preschool, daycare, nursery, or family day care home in California to be fully immunized against ten specified diseases before admission. A medical exemption from a licensed physician is the only way to opt out and still attend a classroom-based program.1California Legislative Information. California Senate Bill 277 – Public Health: Vaccinations
The Ten Required Vaccinations
No school or licensed childcare facility may unconditionally admit a child in California unless the child has been immunized against the following diseases:2California Legislative Information. California Health and Safety Code 120325
- Diphtheria
- Hepatitis B
- Haemophilus influenzae type b
- Measles
- Mumps
- Pertussis (whooping cough)
- Poliomyelitis
- Rubella
- Tetanus
- Varicella (chickenpox)
The California Department of Public Health has authority to add diseases to this list based on recommendations from the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Academy of Family Physicians.2California Legislative Information. California Health and Safety Code 120325 The mandate covers children from preschool through 12th grade, and schools must collect and verify immunization documentation before admission.
Who Can Still Opt Out
Before SB-277, California parents could file a personal belief exemption by submitting a letter or affidavit stating that they opposed immunization on personal or religious grounds. That option is gone. Religious objection alone is no longer a valid basis to send an unvaccinated child to a California school or licensed daycare.
Medical Exemptions
A licensed physician can issue a medical exemption for a child whose health makes vaccination unsafe. The physician must describe the child’s specific condition, explain why immunization is not recommended, and state the probable duration of the exemption.3Official California Legislative Information. SB 277 Senate Bill – Bill Analysis
Qualifying conditions generally track CDC guidelines. Permanent contraindications include severe immunodeficiency disorders, a history of encephalopathy following a prior pertussis-containing vaccine, and Severe Combined Immunodeficiency Disease for rotavirus vaccines. Temporary contraindications include pregnancy and certain acute illnesses, and the CDC notes that most contraindications are temporary rather than lifelong.4Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Contraindications and Precautions
In 2019, California passed SB-276 to formalize how these exemptions are issued and reviewed. Physicians must now use a standardized electronic form submitted directly to the California Immunization Registry, certifying under penalty of perjury that the medical basis for each exempted immunization is accurate.5California Legislative Information. Senate Bill 276 – Public Health: Vaccinations A clinically trained state reviewer, either a physician or registered nurse, examines exemptions in three situations: any exemption from a school with immunization rates below 95 percent, any exemption from a physician who has submitted five or more in a calendar year, and any exemption from a school that has failed to report its vaccination rates.
If a reviewer finds an exemption invalid, the State Public Health Officer can revoke it. Physicians whose exemption practices are found to contribute to a public health risk can be reported to the Medical Board of California and barred from submitting exemption forms for at least two years.
A companion bill, SB-714, protects families whose medical exemptions were issued before 2020: those older exemptions cannot be revoked unless the issuing physician has been subject to Medical Board discipline.6California Legislative Information. Senate Bill 714
Homeschool and Non-Classroom Independent Study
SB-277 does not require vaccination as a condition of education itself. Children enrolled in a home-based private school, or in an independent study program that does not include classroom-based instruction, are exempt from the mandate.3Official California Legislative Information. SB 277 Senate Bill – Bill Analysis A parent who homeschools an unvaccinated child is not violating the law. The rule applies to settings where children are in close physical proximity.
What Happened to Old Personal Belief Exemptions
SB-277 did not remove every unvaccinated child from school on its effective date. Students who had a personal belief exemption on file before January 1, 2016, were allowed to remain enrolled until they entered the next grade span. The law defines three grade spans: birth through preschool, kindergarten through 6th grade (including transitional kindergarten), and 7th through 12th grade.3Official California Legislative Information. SB 277 Senate Bill – Bill Analysis A child grandfathered in as a 3rd grader could stay through 6th grade under the old exemption but had to be fully immunized before starting 7th. Because the highest grade span ends at 12th grade, the grandfathering provision has now largely worked its way through the system.
Why California Passed the Law
The immediate trigger was a measles outbreak that began at Disneyland in late December 2014. By February 2015, 125 confirmed cases had been linked to the theme parks, 110 of them California residents, with additional cases in seven other states, Mexico, and Canada.7Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Measles Outbreak – California, December 2014-February 2015
Public health officials had warned for years about pockets of under-vaccinated communities where personal belief exemptions had become common enough to erode herd immunity. Some California schools had exemption rates above 20 percent. Kindergarten vaccination rates statewide reached 95.6 percent in the 2016–17 school year, up from 92.8 percent the year before, crossing the threshold experts consider necessary for herd immunity against measles.
Legal Challenges to SB-277
Parents challenged SB-277 almost immediately on constitutional grounds, arguing it violated free exercise of religion, due process, parental liberty, and equal protection.
California’s Court of Appeal rejected each argument in Brown v. Smith (2018). On religious freedom, the court wrote that “the right to practice religion freely does not include liberty to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill health or death.” On the fundamental right to public education, the court held that education “is no more sacred than any of the other fundamental rights that have readily given way to a State’s interest in protecting the health and safety of its citizens, and particularly, school children.” Removing the personal belief exemption, the court found, was narrowly drawn to serve the law’s compelling public health objective. The equal protection challenge failed because medically exempt children and children whose parents object personally were found not to be similarly situated.8Justia Law. Brown v. Smith – California Courts of Appeal Decisions
Courts reviewing vaccine mandates continue to rely on Jacobson v. Massachusetts, a 1905 U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding a compulsory smallpox vaccination law. The Court there held that the Constitution “does not import an absolute right in each person to be, at all times and in all circumstances, wholly freed from restraint,” and recognized that individual liberty must yield to reasonable regulations enacted to protect public health.9Justia. Jacobson v. Massachusetts Jacobson also established that the legislature, not the courts, decides in the first instance whether vaccination is the best method of preventing disease.
A Federal Question Still In Motion
The constitutional picture is not entirely settled. In December 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its ruling upholding a New York law that, like SB-277, eliminated religious exemptions for school vaccinations. The case, Miller v. McDonald, must now be re-examined in light of Mahmoud v. Taylor, a summer 2025 decision that recognized parents’ free exercise rights to challenge certain aspects of public school curriculum. The case involves New York rather than California, but any resulting precedent on religious exemptions could affect the framework that has so far supported SB-277.
If a Required Vaccine Causes Injury
Families subject to the mandate should know that a federal no-fault program exists for the rare cases of vaccine injury. The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration, allows a parent or legal guardian to file a petition on behalf of a child believed to have been injured by a covered vaccine. Compensation may be awarded through a finding of injury or a negotiated settlement.10Health Resources & Services Administration. National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program The VICP covers most routine childhood vaccines, including those required under SB-277. Claims related to COVID-19 vaccines are handled separately through the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program.