Background
In 2021, the Department of Defense and the Air Force mandated COVID-19 vaccinations for service members and civilian employees, threatening termination or discipline for non-compliance. Plaintiffs, including an Air Force Officer, NCO, Special Agent, and Engineer, requested religious exemptions which were denied. They sued alleging violations of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the First Amendment, and the Administrative Procedure Act. In December 2022, Congress enacted legislation requiring the Secretary of Defense to rescind the mandates, which occurred in January 2023. The district court dismissed the case as moot, finding no meaningful relief could be provided since the mandates were gone and the plaintiffs had not challenged general accommodation policies.
The court’s reasoning
The court explained that Article III jurisdiction requires a live controversy. Because the Air Force rescinded the vaccine mandates and the plaintiffs’ amended complaint challenged only those specific mandates and their associated denials, the case was moot. The court rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the complaint challenged the general religious accommodation process, noting that the complaint’s language regarding policies and procedures was inextricably linked to the vaccine mandates. The court distinguished this case from other circuits where challenges were found not moot, emphasizing that mootness is highly case-specific and depends on the factual allegations in the complaint.
What it means going forward
Military service members and civilian employees cannot use this specific lawsuit to challenge the Air Force’s general religious accommodation process if the underlying mandate has been rescinded and the complaint was limited to that mandate.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download