Michigan's Vaccine Waiver Course Unlawfully Compels Belief Disclosure Beyond Statutory Authority
Source: Christopher Lloyd Goffos. "Michigan Jab Opt-Out Policy Makes Parents Take Pro-Vax Course." September 14, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
Michigan requires parents seeking a religious/personal vaccine exemption for their kids to take an online course that asks them to rate, on a five-point scale, whether they believe vaccines are safe and effective — with no way to opt out of answering and no clear explanation of what happens to that data. The author argues this goes way beyond what the actual 1978 law or even the 2014 rule requires, effectively forcing parents to declare their beliefs just to exercise a legal right, and that lawmakers have twice rejected making this mandatory, meaning an agency is enforcing a policy the legislature deliberately chose not to pass.
Conclusion
Michigan's mandatory online vaccine education course for nonmedical exemption waivers is an unlawful and unconstitutional overreach that compels parents to declare their beliefs about vaccines, exceeding what both the 1978 statute and the 2014 administrative rule actually authorize.
Premises
- The 1978 statute (MCL 333.9215(2)) requires only a written statement from a parent to the school citing religious or other objection, with no inquiry into the nature or sincerity of that objection.
- The 2014 administrative rule (R 325.176(12)) only requires that the health department certify a parent 'received education' — it assigns no obligation to the parent and prescribes no specific method of delivery, let alone a graded course.
- The course's pre- and post-training assessments require parents to state their level of agreement with pro-vaccine statements on a five-point scale, with no option to decline or object that this is not the state's business.
- The course actively teaches parents that the statutory method (a written statement) is the 'wrong' answer on a graded quiz, inverting the legal hierarchy between statute and administrative rule.
- No privacy policy specific to the course exists to inform parents where their attitudinal data goes or who reviews it, and the county's HIPAA notice does not cover this data collection.
- MDHHS's own rulemaking file reveals the rule was designed to make exemptions harder to obtain (in response to rising waiver rates) rather than genuinely to educate, and evidence shows the course rarely changes parents' minds.
- The Michigan legislature has twice declined (2016, 2024) to codify this educational requirement into statute, meaning the agency is enforcing by rule what elected lawmakers have refused to enact by law.
Assumptions
- Administrative agencies should not be permitted to expand or alter statutory rights through rulemaking beyond what the legislature explicitly authorized.
- Compelling a parent to disclose personal beliefs (even on a survey) in order to exercise a statutory right constitutes a meaningful infringement on liberty, regardless of whether the parent can technically choose any answer.
- The absence of a genuine 'decline to answer' or 'not the state's business' option transforms a knowledge assessment into a compelled expression of opinion.
- Practical necessity (needing the waiver for a child's schooling) effectively negates the voluntariness of the parent's participation in the survey.
- The state's failure to disclose data handling practices is itself a violation of parental/privacy rights, independent of the compelled-speech issue.
- The legislature's repeated refusal to codify the requirement is evidence that the agency is acting beyond its intended authority, rather than merely filling a legislative gap.