Click here for the full list of all colleges of that don’t have CV 19 vaccine mandates. *This list is for your reference only.
PLEASE VERIFY the status of a college's policies by checking the college’s website itself.
# Look for additional protocols required of unvaccinated students if any.
# Policies and website links change very frequently, and accordingly, the info here may no longer be current. And, now that CDC has changed recommendations, colleges may decide to make further changes.
# Check the remainder of the college's website for the college's most recent information, especially: (1) a coronavirus section (2) a student health section, where student immunization requirements may be listed.
# STUDENT EMPLOYEES and HEALTH SCIENCE STUDENTS are often subject to additional vaccine requirements not indicated here
California Bill AB 659: HPV vaccine mandate for school kids just introduced by Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry.
February 9, 2023, California AB 659- HPV vaccine mandate bill was introduced for school kids grade 8 and up by Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry, and co-authored Assembly Members Wendy Carrillo, Friedman, Kalra, Ortega, Papan, and Blanca Rubio and Senator Wiener.
AB 659 will require the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine to attend 8-12 grade in public or private school, starting January 1 2024.
There is a long process before a bill can become a law. This bill has not been assigned to committees yet. But you can start taking action today to voice your opposition.
Action steps:
1) Meet with your CA Assembly Member office to discuss your opposition to AB 659.
2) Meet with your Religious Leaders to ask them to oppose AB 659.
3) Meet with your School Board Members to discuss AB 659 and ask them to oppose the bill.
* As always, maintain a professional demeanor when communicating with legislators and leaders
Please follow us on Twitter @perk_group for latest updates.
Did California ends plans for kids’ Covid-19 vaccine mandate?
There are a lot of questions regarding a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for schools in California. Here is what we know.
Near the end of January of 2023 news outlets reported that it looked like California was quietly walking back plans for kids’ Covid-19 vaccine mandate. “The California Department of Public Health hasn’t made an announcement, but officials told EdSource that the end of the state’s Covid-19 state of emergency on Feb. 28 effectively ends its current plan to add Covid-19 vaccinations to the list of 10 vaccinations children are required to have to attend school in person.” - Edsource.org The California Department of Public Health’s email to FOX news stated:
"As such, CDPH is not currently exploring emergency rulemaking to add COVID-19 vaccinations to the list of required school vaccinations, but we continue to strongly recommend COVID-19 immunization for students and staff to keep everyone safer in the classroom. Any changes to required K-12 immunizations are properly addressed through the legislative process."
There has been no official press release or statement from Governor Newsom’s office on this subject. Still, if and when the Newsom”s administration plans to turn its “pending” COVID-vaccine mandate into an enforceable rule has remained an open question for California’s K-12 students and parents through the first month of 2023.” - Daily Press
California State of Emergency is due to expire Feb. 28th, 2023.
As of February 9, 2023, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its schedule of recommended immunizations to include COVID-19 shots and boosters for children, adolescents and adults.
CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky stated why the experimental vaccine was added to the Childhood Schedule: "The reason ACIP recommended...getting the COVID-19 vaccine on the pediatric schedule, it was ONLY because it was the only way it could be covered in our 'Vaccines for Children' program".
So where does this leave things. As of right now, there is no requirement, law or mandate for Covid-19 vaccine to attend K-12 school in California. There have been a few rogue school districts that have tried to illegally mandate this. There has been ongoing litigation against these districts (PERK/CHD-CA VS. PIEDMONT SCHOOL DISTRICT, PERK/CHD-CA VS. LAUSD, PERK (ARNOLD) VS. GRANADA HILLS CHARTER SCHOOL, Let Them Breathe vs. San Diego Unified School District , etc.)
We have not heard of any COVID-19 vaccine mandate bills for 2023, but we are watching closely to alert you of any legislation submitted in this area. Stay alert and follow us on Twitter @perk_group for the latest updates.
PERK President Amy Bohn interview on Uncover California Podcast
Listen to PERK President and Co-Founder, Amy Bohn’s interview on Uncover California with Lori Mills https://omny.fm/shows/cumulusla/uncover-california-with-lori-mills-1-28-23
Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in Case Against AB 2098
Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in Case Against AB 2098
Dear PERK Members,
Physicians for Informed Consent, NCLA, Doctor Plaintiffs, and CHD brought a lawsuit against AB2098. Greg Glaser, Counsel for PHYSICIANS FOR INFORMED CONSENT worked closely with PERK to oppose AB 2098 during legislative debate. Glaser shared his optimism today with PERK regarding the Court's favorable ruling,
"We're pleased the Federal Court intelligently dissected the new law and plainly criticized it as an unconstitutional attempt to censor physicians. The Court's 30-page opinion is very thorough, well-situated to withstand any appeals. In the Order, the Court referred repeatedly to the declaration of PIC Physician Sanjay Verma, MD who expertly catalogued the State's continual flip flops on Covid science.
Dr. Verma explains in detail how the so-called “consensus” has developed and shifted, often within mere months, throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. (Verma Decl. ¶¶ 13-42.) He also explains how certain conclusions once considered to be within the scientific consensus were later proved to be false. (Id. ¶¶ 8-10.) Because of this unique context, the concept of “scientific consensus” as applied to COVID-19 is inherently flawed.
This is an important win and legal precedent for free speech.”
Please consider donating to PHYSICIANS FOR INFORMED CONSENT or becoming a member. Physicians for Informed Consent was one of the organizations who brought forward this lawsuit on AB2098. PERK would like to congratulate the brave doctor plaintiffs, organizations, as well as the great legal team for defending doctors right to give informed consent. All the doctors in California thank you. See the PIC Press release here and the NCLA PRESS RELEASE below.
Sincerely,
The PERK Team
On Jan. 25, 2023, US District Judge William Shubb ordered that plaintiffs’ motions for preliminary injunction be granted in the case against AB 2098. The preliminary injunction temporarily halts the implementation of the law while the case is tried in court. Here is a copy of the judge’s order. The judge took issue with the vagueness of “contemporary scientific consensus” referred to in the law and found that, “Because the term “scientific consensus” is so ill defined, physician plaintiffs are unable to determine if their intended conduct contradicts the scientific consensus, and accordingly “what is prohibited by the law.”
