NEW Supreme Court filing in Miller v. McDonald reinforces ongoing legal battle against California’s SB 277 and the right of parents to raise their children according to their faith.
ADVOCATES FOR FAITH & FREEDOM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: MONDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2026
CONTACT: NICOLE VELASCO AT
MEDIA@FAITH-FREEDOM.COM
Murrieta, CA — Advocates for Faith & Freedom has filed an amicus curiae brief with the United States Supreme Court in Miller v. McDonald, supporting Amish families fighting to preserve their religious liberty and parental rights against New York’s compulsory school vaccination law.
New York eliminated religious exemptions from its school vaccination requirements after recognizing them for more than 50 years. While medical exemptions remain available, families with sincerely held religious objections face exclusion from religious schooling and substantial financial penalties for noncompliance.
The Supreme Court previously directed the Second Circuit to reconsider the case in light of its ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor, which reaffirmed parents’ constitutional protections in directing their children’s religious upbringing. Yet the lower court again ruled against the Amish families.
Advocates argues that government officials cannot dictate which religious convictions deserve protection while granting exemptions for secular reasons. Such unequal treatment threatens the First Amendment and places government authority above the sincerely held beliefs of American families.
“Religious freedom is not a privilege granted by the government. It is a constitutional right,” said Erin Elizabeth Mersino, Vice President and Chief of Supreme Court and Appellate Litigation. “Parents should never be forced to abandon their faith simply to secure an education for their children.”
The constitutional questions in Miller closely parallel Advocates’ ongoing challenge to California’s SB 277 in Royce v. Bonta, where four mothers are fighting a law that eliminated religious exemptions while retaining numerous secular exceptions.
California previously cited the Miller decision in defense of SB 277, prompting Advocates to challenge that reliance before the Ninth Circuit. The ruling in Royce remains pending.
At stake in both cases is a fundamental principle: Government cannot simply disregard religious liberty when it becomes inconvenient. Advocates urges the Supreme Court to grant review and reaffirm the constitutional limits on government interference with parental rights and religious conscience.