House committee advances bill ending nonmedical vaccine exemptions for school entry

The House Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs voted 3–3 with two reservations on Feb. 21 to advance HB1118 HD1, a measure that would repeal nonmedical exemptions to school immunization requirements but grandfather in students with existing religious exemptions.

The committee chair, Representative Jared Tarnas, recommended passage with technical edits and an amendment to correct statutory language and to grandfather current exemptions. “If we act early, we can afford potentially a more gradual change,” Tarnas said during closing remarks explaining the committee’s rationale and the drafting choices intended to preserve neutrality and objective medical exemptions.

Why it matters: State public health officials and pediatric groups told the committee they are concerned that declining vaccination coverage and rising exemption rates leave Hawaii vulnerable to outbreaks of highly contagious, vaccine-preventable diseases, especially measles. Dr. Kenny Fink, director of the Hawaii Department of Health, told the panel that the department has seen rising exemption rates and pointed to recent outbreaks on the U.S. mainland as evidence of increased risk. “When those students are exposed and infected, they can go home and then infect their families,” Fink said, adding that early action can change the current upward trajectory in exemptions.

Supporters’ case: Testimony in favor, including from medical and disability advocates, emphasized the protection of medically fragile students who cannot be vaccinated and the community-wide benefits of higher immunization coverage. The Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities and the American Academy of Pediatrics (Hawaii chapter) submitted testimony urging lawmakers to reduce nonmedical exemptions to protect herd immunity and to prevent severe illness and hospitalization among infants and immunocompromised people.

Opponents’ case: Hundreds of residents testified in opposition, saying the bill infringes on parental and religious rights, and several who identified as vaccine-injured urged lawmakers to preserve religious and philosophical exemptions. Multiple speakers pressed for alternatives such as targeted outreach, improved health education, or stricter medical-exemption oversight rather than repealing religious exemptions. Representative Chelsea Garcia, who voted no, said the public has clearly expressed opposition and urged the department to rebuild trust through community engagement rather than by mandate.

Committee action and vote: The committee adopted the measure with technical amendments and an edit requested by the Department of Education to fix statutory wording. The recorded positions announced at the roll call were: Chair Jared Tarnas — yes; Representative Tom Hasham — yes; Representative Val Takayama — yes; Representative Poipoi — reservation; Representative Bellotti — reservation; Representative Peruso — no; Representative Chelsea Garcia — no; Representative Shimizu — no. Committee members Cochran, Todd and others were excused. Recommendation adopted and the bill advances with the cited amendments.

What the bill does and limits: As drafted and amended in committee, HB1118 HD1 would remove nonmedical exemptions (including religious exemptions) from the statutory school-entry immunization requirements going forward, while (1) grandfathering students who already held religious exemptions before the 2025–26 school year and (2) preserving medical exemptions based on objective, clinician-signed criteria. The committee also removed language that inappropriately referenced membership in an “established church.”

Next steps: The measure moves on in the legislative process with committee amendments recorded in the hearing. Opponents indicated plans to press constitutional arguments in later stages; proponents said they will continue outreach to clarify implementation details. The Department of Health and Department of Education will be among agencies asked to prepare implementation notes and cost/fiscal impacts if the bill proceeds.

Ending: Lawmakers split along policy and constitutional lines, with members urging caution about both public health risks and the scope of government authority over religious practice. The bill’s path through the Legislature will determine whether the state pursues a statutory limit on nonmedical exemptions or follows a different route of outreach and targeted interventions.