HB5044 / SB450 PRESS RELEASE
DOWNLOAD CTRAMM 3/5/26 PRESS RELEASE BELOW:
| connecticut_attempts_to_change_religious_freedom_law_during_active_federal_lawsuit.pdf |
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 5, 2026
Connecticut Attempts to Change Religious Freedom Law During Active Federal Lawsuit 16,000+ residents oppose bills that would alter legal framework while case proceeds in federal court
HARTFORD, CT — Connecticut legislators are advancing two bills that legal experts say represent an unprecedented attempt to rewrite religious freedom protections while those protections are being litigated in federal court. SB450 and HB5044, currently under consideration in the Connecticut General Assembly, have sparked massive public opposition: more than 16,000 Connecticut residents have signed a statewide petition in just three weeks, and approximately 7,000 pieces of written testimony have been filed, one of the largest public responses to legislation in Connecticut history.
SB450 would remove the applicability of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) specifically in cases involving vaccine-related policies in Connecticut. The bill was introduced while Kelly Spillane v. State of Connecticut, a federal lawsuit challenging Connecticut's 2021 removal of religious exemptions for school vaccines, is actively proceeding in court. After years of attempting to dismiss the case, the state's motion was denied and the lawsuit is moving forward under RFRA protections. Now, while that litigation continues, the legislature has introduced SB450, which would eliminate the very legal framework under which the case is being heard. "The State of Connecticut is setting a deeply troubling precedent," said Kate Prokop, President and Founder of Connecticut Residents Against Medical Mandates (CTRAMM). "After a judge ruled that this case will proceed under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, lawmakers introduced legislation to remove RFRA protections specifically for vaccines while the case is still being litigated. Changing the law in the middle of an active lawsuit threatens the integrity of the judicial process." During legislative testimony this week, Lindy Urso, the attorney representing the plaintiffs in Spillane, stated that in his 30 years of legal practice he has never seen a state attempt to change the law in the middle of a lawsuit in order to win its claim.
Simultaneously, Governor Ned Lamont has introduced HB5044, which would:
● Create a formal adult vaccine schedule in Connecticut for the first time
● Transfer authority over vaccine schedule determinations to the Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Public Health
● Remove an existing regulatory review process that provided legislative oversight
Opponents argue the combined effect of both bills would significantly expand executive branch authority over vaccine policy while simultaneously eliminating religious freedom protections, all while the constitutionality of Connecticut's existing vaccine mandate is being challenged in federal court. Advocates say the issue has implications beyond Connecticut and could set a national precedent for how states respond to litigation involving religious liberty and public health policy. CTRAMM is bringing these concerns to federal policymakers, including Senator Ron Johnson, Congressman Greg Steube, Senator Rand Paul, and Congressman Joe Courtney.
### MEDIA CONTACT: Kate Prokop President and Founder Connecticut Residents Against Medical Mandates (CTRAMM) Phone: 1 (631) 766-4512 Email: [email protected] Website: www.ctramm.com ABOUT CTRAMM: Connecticut Residents Against Medical Mandates Inc. (CTRAMM) is a 501(c)(4) non-profit organization dedicated to protecting individual rights at the state level. CTRAMM believes no resident should be forced, coerced, or deceived into any medical choices that violate their will, conscience, or religious beliefs.
Connecticut Attempts to Change Religious Freedom Law During Active Federal Lawsuit 16,000+ residents oppose bills that would alter legal framework while case proceeds in federal court
HARTFORD, CT — Connecticut legislators are advancing two bills that legal experts say represent an unprecedented attempt to rewrite religious freedom protections while those protections are being litigated in federal court. SB450 and HB5044, currently under consideration in the Connecticut General Assembly, have sparked massive public opposition: more than 16,000 Connecticut residents have signed a statewide petition in just three weeks, and approximately 7,000 pieces of written testimony have been filed, one of the largest public responses to legislation in Connecticut history.
SB450 would remove the applicability of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) specifically in cases involving vaccine-related policies in Connecticut. The bill was introduced while Kelly Spillane v. State of Connecticut, a federal lawsuit challenging Connecticut's 2021 removal of religious exemptions for school vaccines, is actively proceeding in court. After years of attempting to dismiss the case, the state's motion was denied and the lawsuit is moving forward under RFRA protections. Now, while that litigation continues, the legislature has introduced SB450, which would eliminate the very legal framework under which the case is being heard. "The State of Connecticut is setting a deeply troubling precedent," said Kate Prokop, President and Founder of Connecticut Residents Against Medical Mandates (CTRAMM). "After a judge ruled that this case will proceed under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, lawmakers introduced legislation to remove RFRA protections specifically for vaccines while the case is still being litigated. Changing the law in the middle of an active lawsuit threatens the integrity of the judicial process." During legislative testimony this week, Lindy Urso, the attorney representing the plaintiffs in Spillane, stated that in his 30 years of legal practice he has never seen a state attempt to change the law in the middle of a lawsuit in order to win its claim.
Simultaneously, Governor Ned Lamont has introduced HB5044, which would:
● Create a formal adult vaccine schedule in Connecticut for the first time
● Transfer authority over vaccine schedule determinations to the Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Public Health
● Remove an existing regulatory review process that provided legislative oversight
Opponents argue the combined effect of both bills would significantly expand executive branch authority over vaccine policy while simultaneously eliminating religious freedom protections, all while the constitutionality of Connecticut's existing vaccine mandate is being challenged in federal court. Advocates say the issue has implications beyond Connecticut and could set a national precedent for how states respond to litigation involving religious liberty and public health policy. CTRAMM is bringing these concerns to federal policymakers, including Senator Ron Johnson, Congressman Greg Steube, Senator Rand Paul, and Congressman Joe Courtney.
### MEDIA CONTACT: Kate Prokop President and Founder Connecticut Residents Against Medical Mandates (CTRAMM) Phone: 1 (631) 766-4512 Email: [email protected] Website: www.ctramm.com ABOUT CTRAMM: Connecticut Residents Against Medical Mandates Inc. (CTRAMM) is a 501(c)(4) non-profit organization dedicated to protecting individual rights at the state level. CTRAMM believes no resident should be forced, coerced, or deceived into any medical choices that violate their will, conscience, or religious beliefs.
HB 5044 and SB450 are not a minor administrative update. It does two major things:
#1 It removes the Regulatory Review Committee from the approval process for adding immunizations to the schedule.
#2 It creates the framework that allows adult vaccine mandates to be implemented without meaningful legislative oversight.
*#3 SB450 removes all religious protections for adults surrounding vaccines by removing RFRA from vaccines.
This is not a partisan issue. This is a structural power shift.
Whether you are pro-vaccine, vaccine-neutral, or simply believe in checks and balances, this bill centralizes authority in a way that should concern every Connecticut resident.
Read HB5044: C G A - Connecticut General Assembly Bill 5044
Read SB450: C G A - Connecticut General Assembly Bill 450
This bill removes a bipartisan regulatory review layer and expands executive authority over immunization policy. We believe in informed citizens.
Sign the Petition here: OPPOSE HB5044 and SB450
We are gathering signatures from Connecticut residents who oppose:
• The removal of the Regulatory Review Committee
• The consolidation of immunization authority
• The framework for adult vaccine mandates without oversight
If you believe legislative oversight matters, add your name.
Questions About the Bill? Read the HB 5044 SB540 Q&A
#1 It removes the Regulatory Review Committee from the approval process for adding immunizations to the schedule.
#2 It creates the framework that allows adult vaccine mandates to be implemented without meaningful legislative oversight.
*#3 SB450 removes all religious protections for adults surrounding vaccines by removing RFRA from vaccines.
This is not a partisan issue. This is a structural power shift.
Whether you are pro-vaccine, vaccine-neutral, or simply believe in checks and balances, this bill centralizes authority in a way that should concern every Connecticut resident.
Read HB5044: C G A - Connecticut General Assembly Bill 5044
Read SB450: C G A - Connecticut General Assembly Bill 450
This bill removes a bipartisan regulatory review layer and expands executive authority over immunization policy. We believe in informed citizens.
Sign the Petition here: OPPOSE HB5044 and SB450
We are gathering signatures from Connecticut residents who oppose:
• The removal of the Regulatory Review Committee
• The consolidation of immunization authority
• The framework for adult vaccine mandates without oversight
If you believe legislative oversight matters, add your name.
Questions About the Bill? Read the HB 5044 SB540 Q&A
Click to set custom HTML