- A 16-year-old New York student won a federal court case against her school district after being barred from education for refusing a vaccine that doctors warned could harm her.
- Sarah Doe, supported by Children’s Health Defense, proved schools cannot override a physician’s medical judgment under the ADA, setting a crucial legal precedent.
- After suffering severe autoimmune reactions from an expedited vaccine schedule, Sarah submitted seven medical exemptions—all ignored by the school district’s unexamined rejections.
- The ruling reinforces that schools must respect individualized healthcare decisions, challenging blanket mandates that disregard documented medical risks.
- This victory strengthens parental rights and medical freedom, signaling a shift in how institutions handle vaccine exemptions nationwide.
COVID-19 vaccine mandates in schools might be fading, but there are still numerous educational institutions across the country that try to force other types of vaccines on their students without regard for their health. But now, in a major victory for medical freedom and parental rights, a 16-year-old New York student has successfully fought her school district in federal court to regain access to education after being barred for refusing a vaccine that doctors warned could harm her.
Sarah Doe, whose identity has been protected in court filings, was forced out of Oceanside School District after officials rejected seven medical exemptions—including one from a physician who refused to administer the vaccine upon seeing her adverse reaction. Backed by Children’s Health Defense (CHD), Sarah’s case has set a critical precedent: school bureaucrats cannot override a treating physician’s medical judgment under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ruling not only allows Sarah to return to school this fall but also challenges the unchecked power of institutions that prioritize blanket mandates over individualized healthcare decisions.
Sarah's battle for medical autonomy
Sarah’s ordeal began in 2019 when New York eliminated all non-medical vaccine exemptions, stripping families of religious and philosophical opt-outs. Faced with the impossible choice to violate her faith or forfeit her education, Sarah’s family reluctantly agreed to an expedited vaccination schedule. The consequences were devastating. Within months, Sarah developed severe autoimmune conditions, kidney dysfunction, and a bleeding disorder, leaving doctors baffled. "It’s just her body responding to all those vaccines at once that just shut her down almost," her mother, Jane Doe, told The Daily Wire. "All of a sudden, the new norm was seeing doctors."
Despite submitting blood titer tests proving immunity and seven separate medical exemptions, including one from a physician who noticed Sarah’s rash and refused to vaccinate her, the school district dismissed every plea. Instead of examining Sarah, the district’s unnamed physician rejected the exemptions without even reviewing her medical history. "They don’t care at all," Sarah said, describing the emotional toll of being treated as a health hazard rather than a student.
A legal turning point for medical rights
The case gained traction after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor, which reinforced that religious liberty claims in education must undergo "strict scrutiny", which means blanket policies cannot override sincere individual beliefs. While Mahmoud addressed LGBTQ+ curriculum disputes, attorney Sujata Gibson argued it also protects vaccine exemptions. "The Mahmoud ruling is a landmark victory for parental rights and religious liberty," Gibson stated. "It ensures that sincerely held beliefs, including those concerning vaccination, must be given the highest level of protection."
The federal judge in Sarah’s case agreed, ruling that schools cannot disregard treating physicians’ medical exemptions under the ADA. This decision dismantles the dangerous precedent of allowing administrators to dictate healthcare rather than doctors. "These school districts are flat-out discriminatory and dangerous," Gibson said, noting that New York law permits students with active Hepatitis B infections to attend school, yet Sarah was barred for missing one dose.
Sarah’s victory is more than personal; it’s a warning to governments and institutions that seek to enforce one-size-fits-all medical mandates. The case exposes the hypocrisy of a system that claims to prioritize public health while ignoring documented risks to individual students. As Gibson noted, the district’s actions violated federal disability laws, yet they persisted until forced to relent by a court order.
The implications extend beyond New York. With similar battles raging nationwide, this ruling empowers families to challenge arbitrary denials of medical accommodations. CHD has vowed to continue fighting for students "until no child is denied an education for standing by their medical needs."
Sources for this article include:
Please contact us for more information.