The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals has established a timeline for the ongoing vaccine exemption case originating from Raleigh County. This decision follows a scheduling order issued by Circuit Judge Michael E. Froble on November 26, which outlines deadlines for the involved parties to submit their legal briefs.
According to the order, the petitioners, which include the West Virginia Board of Education (WVBOE) and affiliated members, must file their initial brief and accompanying documents by March 26, 2024. This deadline is set based on the date of the judgment currently under appeal. Following the petitioners’ submission, the respondents, led by Miranda G., will have 45 days to present their own brief. Subsequently, the petitioners will be allocated 20 days to respond to any arguments made by the respondents.
The timeline allows for the possibility of earlier submissions, which could expedite the process. Additionally, either party may request to shorten the review period or seek extensions if more time is needed.
Once the deadline for the reply brief has passed, the case will be ready for the court’s consideration, as stipulated by the Rules of Appellate Procedure. The Supreme Court may then choose to decide the case based on the submitted briefs without conducting oral arguments. Alternatively, the court could schedule a hearing, with the final date for oral arguments during the winter/spring term set for May 26, 2024. This term will conclude on June 11, 2024, with the next court session starting on September 2, 2024.
This case escalated to the state Supreme Court following a direct review order issued on Friday. The petitioners had initially sought a motion for direct review to contest a lower court decision that granted a permanent injunction against the education boards. This injunction, combined with a class action certification, prevents the boards from denying religious exemptions for required student vaccinations.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court issued a stay, temporarily pausing the enforcement of the injunction and any further proceedings until the petitioners’ challenge regarding the class action certification is resolved. In their motion for direct review, the petitioners emphasized that the legal issues at stake are significant enough to warrant the Supreme Court’s immediate attention. They argued that these matters are of statewide importance, stressing the need for a timely resolution.
