West Virginia House Bill HB3384

West Virginia 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/14/25
• Refer: 3/14/25

Caption

To prohibit public colleges and universities in this state from requiring vaccines for admission.

Summary

HB3384 would add a new section to West Virginia law prohibiting higher education institutions from imposing vaccine mandates on students, faculty, or staff as a condition of enrollment, employment, or participation in campus activities or services. The bill defines “higher education institution” broadly to include public and private postsecondary institutions operating under Chapter 18B, and defines “vaccine mandate” as any legal requirement or policy conditioning access on vaccination. The bill also bars colleges and universities from offering rewards or incentives, monetary or otherwise, for receiving a vaccination, immunization, or any medical procedure. At the same time, it allows institutions to offer vaccines or immunizations at no cost, so long as any vaccine administered on campus is provided with informed consent. It further states that students, faculty, and staff may not be denied educational programs, services, or employment opportunities solely because they choose not to be vaccinated. The measure includes a severability clause and would take effect immediately upon passage.

Impact

If enacted, HB3384 would limit the authority of West Virginia higher education institutions to require vaccination as a condition of access or participation, affecting both public and private colleges, universities, and community and technical colleges covered by Chapter 18B. It would also restrict campus-based vaccine incentive programs and require informed consent for vaccines administered on campus, while preserving the ability of institutions to offer vaccines free of charge. The bill would create a statewide rule overriding contrary institutional policies on vaccine requirements in higher education.

Sentiment

The bill’s stated purpose and caption indicate a strong pro-personal-choice, anti-mandate approach, and the sponsor list suggests support from a group of delegates aligned with that position. No committee transcript or vote record is available here, so there is no documented debate or recorded opposition in the provided materials. Based on the text alone, the measure appears designed to appeal to constituents concerned about medical autonomy and limits on institutional COVID-era or other vaccine requirements.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the balance between individual choice and institutional public-health authority. Supporters would favor the bill as protecting students, faculty, and staff from vaccine requirements and incentives, while opponents may argue that colleges and universities should retain discretion to set health and safety policies for campus communities. Another likely issue is the bill’s broad reach to both public and private higher education institutions and its prohibition on incentives, which could be seen as limiting voluntary public-health promotion efforts.