doza-Vaca representing their minor children presented an Amended Complaint challenging vaccination practice in New York on both the state and the federal law grounds. The plaintiffs claim that they have sincere religious beliefs, which are contrary to immunization practice. In one of their Amendment cause of Action, the three plaintiffs claimed that their religious rights were being violated when the school excluded their children from the school institution because of their religious beliefs thus running counter to the immunization practice. The three plaintiffs argued that the school arbitrarily and unconstitutionally denied their children the right to exercise their religious freedom that was based on the vaccination practice (Phillips v. City of New York. (2014).
In this case, the court consolidated the actions of the three plaintiffs. For various reasons, the courts granted the New York City Departments of education and Defendants City of New York motion and dismissed the three plaintiffs on the Amended Protest in its entirety. In reference to Philips vs. New York, number 14-2156-cv, Lynch, Chin and Korman who were the judges upheld the decision of Judge William Kuntz on finding the law passed on constitutional muster. In reviewing the case to terminate pursuant to rule, the judges were supposed to accept the realistic allegations that were set forth by the plaintiffs as true. The children of the three plaintiffs were therefore granted religious exemptions in reference to the mandatory vaccinations. However, despite their religious exemptions, the three plaintiffs still complained of their children’s exclusion from school on every occasion where their children’s schoolmate reported a vaccine preventable disease case.
Vaccination against life-threatening diseases remains one of the greatest achievements in health in the United States history. Generally, millions of premature death cases have been prevented while countless children have been rescued from