Spillane v. Lamont, 350 Conn. 119

The plaintiffs, Keira Spillane and Anna Kehle, are parents challenging the constitutionality of a Connecticut law (P.A. 21-6) that repealed the religious exemption for school vaccination requirements but retained medical exemptions.
The plaintiffs claimed that mandatory vaccination without a religious exemption violated their constitutional rights to free exercise of religion, equal protection, and a free public education, as well as rights under Connecticut's Religious Freedom statute (§ 52-571b).
The trial court denied the state officials' motion to dismiss, finding exceptions to sovereign immunity based on substantial constitutional claims and a statutory waiver for religious freedom claims.
The defendants (Governor and state education/health officials, plus local school boards) appealed, arguing sovereign immunity barred the suit.
The appeal reached the Connecticut Supreme Court, which reviewed whether the plaintiffs' claims could overcome sovereign immunity and whether the statutory religious freedom claim could proceed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sovereign immunity for constitutional claims	Constitutional claims are "substantial," so exceptions apply and immunity is overcome	A claim must be legally viable and substantial under governing law to defeat immunity	Substantial claim exception requires legal sufficiency; here, claims are foreclosed
Free Exercise/Equal Protection	Repealing the religious exemption violates religious rights and discriminates against religious objectors	Law is neutral, generally applicable, and rationally related to legitimate public health; prior cases reject identical challenges	P.A. 21-6 is neutral/generally applicable; claim fails as a matter of law
Right to Education	Law forces choosing between fundamental right to education and religion	Vaccine requirement is a reasonable condition of school enrollment and long upheld	Requirement is reasonable and doesn’t violate constitutional right to education
Statutory waiver under § 52-571b	Statute waives immunity and applies strict scrutiny to all government burdens on religious exercise	Waiver doesn't reach legislation; later law (P.A. 21-6) should be presumed to override	Statute waives immunity for such claims; claim can proceed under § 52-571b

Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (school vaccine mandate upheld under police power, pre-free exercise incorporation)
Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (free exercise clause does not relieve obligation to comply with neutral, generally applicable law)
Zucht v. King, 260 U.S. 174 (state may require vaccination for school entry)
Sheff v. O’Neill, 238 Conn. 1 (Connecticut education clause interpreted to guarantee substantially equal educational opportunity)
Campbell v. Board of Education, 193 Conn. 93 (not all education-related regulations trigger strict scrutiny)
Bissell v. Davison, 65 Conn. 183 (Connecticut’s early vaccine requirement upheld against constitutional challenge)
Columbia Air Services, Inc. v. Dept. of Transportation, 293 Conn. 342 (standards for sovereign immunity and its exceptions)