Mississippi House Bill HB1452

Mississippi 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/17/22
• Refer: 1/17/22
• Failed: 2/1/22

Caption

COVID-19 vaccine mandates; prohibit the State of Mississippi from imposing.

Impact

Should HB 1452 pass, it will significantly alter public health policy in Mississippi, particularly in how COVID-19 vaccinations are mandated or suggested by state or local authorities. The bill stipulates that educational and employment opportunities cannot hinge on an individual's decision regarding vaccination. This could lead to an environment where vaccine uptake is chiefly voluntary and incentivized rather than mandatory, reflecting a shift away from governmental mandates during public health crises. In the event of a virulent variant affecting children, however, the bill outlines a process for the legislature to consider temporary suspensions of its own provisions to respond to that public health threat.

Summary

House Bill 1452, introduced in the Mississippi Legislature, seeks to prohibit any state agency, political subdivision, or local official from imposing vaccine mandates for coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). The definition of 'coerce' is broadened in the bill to include using intimidation or benefit conditions to compel individuals to receive vaccinations, thereby emphasizing a stance against forced vaccinations under any circumstance. This act aims to ensure that individuals are not compelled to receive vaccines through coercive practices or the threat of losing employment or public benefits. Additionally, it is stipulated that the Department of Health shall keep updated information about the safety and efficacy of approved vaccines accessible to the public.

Contention

The bill has generated debate over the balance between public health safety and individual rights. Proponents argue that the bill protects personal freedoms and prevents government overreach in health matters. However, critics express concerns that voiding mandatory vaccination policies could hinder efforts to manage public health emergencies effectively, particularly in protecting vulnerable populations. The stipulation that state-owned medical facilities must seek legislative approval before implementing mandates adds another layer of administrative control that some see as excessively bureaucratic during urgent health crises.