California’s new vaccine law sparks outcry over parental rights and corporate influence
By willowt // 2025-09-23
Copy
 
  • California signs into law stricter vaccine guidelines, shifting oversight from the CDC.
  • Critics decry the move as a government overreach eroding parental autonomy.
  • States defy federal guidance through the newly formed West Coast Health Alliance.
  • Laws like AB 144 face backlash for limiting medical exemptions and homeschool threats.
  • Legal and liability concerns emerge as vaccine recommendations diverge from CDC standards.
California’s decision to abandon federal vaccine guidelines and create its own framework has ignited a fierce debate over parental rights, medical freedom and the erosion of constitutional principles. Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 144 and additional laws in September 2025, transferring vaccine mandate authority from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to state health bodies and medical organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). The move, part of the West Coast Health Alliance pact with Oregon, Washington and Hawaii, follows months of criticism against the CDC’s perceived politicization under the Trump administration. Opponents argue the laws usurp democratic freedoms, criminalize dissent and prioritize corporate interests over families. At stake: parental authority, vaccine injury liability and the future of health autonomy in America.

State authority shifts from CDC to local bodies

California’s new laws formalize a seismic power grab in public health. The state now follows guidelines from the AAP, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), sidelining the CDC—a historic departure from federal oversight. The shift comes amid backlash against federal policies under the Trump-era CDC, which critics say lost scientific credibility. The West Coast Health Alliance, launched in September 2025, formalizes this defiance, issuing regional vaccine mandates for flu, RSV and children’s COVID-19 shots. “Science matters,” declared Newsom, justifying the alliance’s formation. However, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Director Andrew Nixon fired back, accusing the states of “failed politics” that ignore CDC-backed “Gold Standard Science.”

A blow to parental rights

The laws’ most contentious provision dismantles vaccine exemptions. California, which already disallowed religious exemptions, now requires health practitioners—not parents—to sign off on medical exemptions. Tracy Slepcevic, founder of Autism Health and mother of a vaccine-injured child, called this “government control at its worst.” Laws such as AB 144 leave parents in a bind: comply with mandates or face homeschooling. “Parents are being forced into a corner,” Slepcevic wrote on Substack. “This is not ‘choice’—it’s communism disguised as public health.” Historical context amplifies tensions. Dr. Alex Johnson, a health rights advocate, had warned of such moves since 2011, predicting the attack on philosophical exemptions—a trend now confronting California families. Dr. Tim O’Shea, a chiropractor, echoed Johnson’s concerns, stating the laws prioritize “control” over informed consent.

Legal and financial ramifications

The divergence from CDC guidelines carries unintended consequences. Vaccines not endorsed by the CDC may no longer qualify for liability protections under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, noted vaccine rights advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. This exposes manufacturers and providers to lawsuits—a risk critics argue officials are ignoring. Attorney Ray Flores warned that states “going rogue” may invalidate federal liability shields like the PREP Act, leaving makers of state-endorsed but unapproved vaccines vulnerable. “This could open the door for [Kennedy] to revoke protections,” Flores said. Meanwhile, the law requires insurers to cover state-recommended vaccines—even if the CDC rejects them. This coerces families into using unproven medications, Slepcevic argues, further exacerbating distrust in medical systems.

Organized opposition and call for action

Health freedom advocates vow resistance. Slepcevic urged parents to seek exemption-friendly doctors, organize local groups and vote in 2026. “This is our moment to reclaim autonomy,” she declared, citing homeschool networks and legal challenges as tools for defiance. Legislators like Bob Ferguson (D-Washington) defend the alliances, citing “shared clinical decision-making” as key to public health. Yet activists argue such rhetoric masks authoritarianism. The Health Revolution Podcast’s Dr. Johnson reminds listeners: “The science of lying” drives these laws, not safety.

 The tipping point for health freedom?

California’s laws represent a alarming escalation in the war over medical autonomy. As the West Coast alliance expands, other states may follow, normalizing a system where mandates supersede rights. The fight isn’t just about vaccines—it’s about who controls our bodies and futures. With November 2026 elections looming, voters face a stark choice: complacency or rebellion. As Slepcevic warns, “Our children’s rights are at stake. Together, we’ll fight or we’ll surrender.” Sources for this article include: ChildrensHealthDefense.org ABCnews.com Substack.com
Copy