H 443 Civil Rights Protection Bill Eliminates Vaccination Status Discrimination

H 443 Civil Rights Protection Bill Eliminates Vaccination Status Discrimination

It’s surprising that in 2020 these concepts continue to be such a struggle. The chairman of House Commerce and Human Resources took the vaccine discrimination in the workplace bill, the ‘Medical Consumer Protection Act,’ off the agenda last week. He and the rest of the committee need to hear from the people! We need to express to them just how important this protection is to our medical professionals and others whose bodily autonomy and privacy rights are being violated with the threat of their livelihood being wrongly terminated. This bill will not get a hearing and will die if the people do not get loud about how crucial this is.”

H 443 is fundamentally a Civil Rights Bill protecting employees’ rights to conscience. H 443 is a bipartisan bill that deserves the support of all legislators and Idahoans, regardless of party or religious affiliation.


House Bill 443 It prohibits an employer, who is contracted with the state from discriminating against an employee or an applicant based on their immunization status. 

If you have been fired, not hired, quit a job, been harassed/coerced or chose not to apply for or accept a job because of your vaccination status, share your story with committee members and your legislators. If you are concerned that the profession you are currently in may start mandating vaccines as a requirement for you to keep your job, share your concern. 


EMAIL LIST: [email protected], [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

Rep. James Holtzclaw, Chair
District 20
Statehouse (208) 332-1041 (Session Only)
[email protected]

Rep. Neil A. Anderson, Vice Chair
District 31
Statehouse (208) 332-1086 (Session Only)
[email protected]

Rep. Steven Harris
District 21
Statehouse (208) 332-1043 (Session Only)
[email protected]

Rep. Mike Kingsley
District 6
Statehouse (208) 332-1133 (Session Only)
[email protected]

Rep. Scott A. Syme
District 11
Statehouse (208) 332-1047 (Session Only)
[email protected]

Rep. Chad Christensen
District 32
Statehouse (208) 332-1183 (Session Only)
[email protected]

Rep. Priscilla Giddings
District 7
Statehouse (208) 332-1033 (Session Only)
[email protected]

Rep. Tony Wisniewski
District 3
Statehouse (208) 332-1060 (Session Only)
[email protected]

Rep. Timothy Remington
District 2
Statehouse (208) 332-1070 (Session Only)
[email protected]

Rep. Sue Chew
District 17
Statehouse (208) 332-1049 (Session Only)
[email protected]

Rep. Chris Abernathy
District 29
Statehouse (208) 332-1079 (Session Only)
[email protected]

Rep. Jake Ellis
District 15
Statehouse (208) 332-1176 (Session Only)
[email protected]


Individuals choose to opt-out of vaccination for moral objection, reasons of conscience, religious reasons:

Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from religious discrimination, harassment, and loss of employment. Religious beliefs are defined to include theistic beliefs as well as non-theistic “moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right and wrong, which are sincerely held with the strength of traditional religious views”.

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission lawsuits have been filed when employees have been fired, or applicants were not hired for refusing the flu vaccine. These lawsuits have resulted in reinstatement, back pay and punitive damages. Some examples are –  St. Vincent Health CenterMemorial HealthcareMission HospitalMemorial Healthcare) However, lawsuits are costly and time-consuming.

Employees should not have to file a lawsuit in order to have their rights upheld and protected.

The US Dept. of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) allows employees to decline Hepatitis B VaccinesOSHA and many labor unions also oppose annual influenza vaccination policies that do not include religious and/or personal objection exemptions.

Individuals choose to opt-out of vaccination for safety concerns & concerns about the effectiveness of the vaccines

There are many reasons an individual employee may choose to decline a vaccine in addition to sincerely held religious beliefs. There are serious safety concerns and concerns about the effectiveness of the vaccine.

H 443 should be supported because it will protect employees who decline a vaccine from adverse actions by their employers for both religious and conscientious beliefs.

These are only suggested points and references. The most important thing to remember is to make your testimony personal. In-person meetings with legislators are best if possible, a phone call – leaving a voice mail if you can’t get through. Make sure your voice is heard!

Please remember that this is NOT a bill about vaccine safety and efficacy or about childhood vaccine exemptions. H 443 is about protecting workers from discrimination due to vaccination decisions and status.

We must be our own media. SHARE THIS with friends and family!


Censorship will be our biggest hurdle in 2020. They have shut down our primary source of communication via social media. The newspapers will not publish editorials that are contrary to the common narrative. We have to be our own media. YOU have the responsibility to let everyone know.

They don’t give us notice. They change meetings to reduce the number of people who can comment. They make it difficult. We will press on and hold them accountable to their position as OUR representatives – they are supposed to work for us!

Leave a Reply