On February 15, Judge Tilman E. Self, III of the US District Court in Georgia issued a strong opinion upholding religious liberty and health freedom. The case was brought by an anonymous Air Force Officer challenging the military’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

In September 2021, the Air Force issued a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all personnel “unless exempted” with a deadline of October 28, 2021.  Before that date, Officers had to, “provide either a completed request for religious accommodation . . . or proof of a medical exemption approved by a military medical provider.” The Officer in this case submitted a Religious Accommodation Request on October 13, 2021 and the request was rejected.

Judge Self begins his opinion by quoting, with a touch of sarcasm, the Air Force’s position on the unnamed Officer’s situation: “Your religious beliefs are sincere, it’s [sic] just not compatible with military service.” The Judge then notes that the Air Force has an “abysmal” record on religious accommodation requests.

The Officer is suing based on the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. Quoting an earlier decision in a Navy Seals case, Judge Self says that while the Air Force claims to have a religious accommodation process, “it proved to be nothing more than a quixotic quest for Plaintiff because it was ‘by all accounts, . . . theater.’”

Air Force Offers Late Evidence of Exemptions

In spite of thousands of religious exemption requests, as of the filing of this case the Air Force had granted zero of them. Not sounding pleased, Judge Self offers that even though he told all parties that the opportunity to offer evidence was over at the injunction hearing, the military filed a declaration six days later stating that, “as of February 4, 2022, nine . . . religious accommodation requests . . . have been approved within” the Air Force. Doing the math, the judge points out that this raises the rate at which religious exemptions were granted from 0.00% to 0.24% and states that, “Defendants’ last-minute efforts to inject something new into the record doesn’t change the Court’s opinion because what [the] declaration doesn’t tell the Court is when the Air Force granted these nine religious exemptions.” (Italics added.) Looking at the Air Force’s COVID-19 website, the Judge saw that zero exemptions were granted as of January 31 and noted, “In other words, the Air Force granted these nine exemptions in the last two weeks.”  As of January 13, the Air Force had disapproved 2,787 requests, had 2,443 pending, and had granted zero.

Officer’s “Body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit”

For over 25 years, the plaintiff Officer served the USAF, “with an unblemished disciplinary record.” Judge Self pointed out that the Officer recovered from COVID and twice provided positive antibody tests, yet this did not qualify for an exemption. But the Officer, who is a Christian, “sincerely believes that receiving a vaccine that was derived from or tested on aborted fetal tissue in its development would violate” their conscience and  goes against  their faith. The Officer also believes that injecting themself, “with a novel substance of unknown long-term effects” like a COVID-19 vaccine would go against their conviction that their “body is the temple of the Holy Spirit.” So, the Officer had a choice of complying with the service’s vaccine order or violating their own religious beliefs.

No Pay, No Benefits, No Responsibilities

The suing Officer’s request was denied on October 26, after an alleged careful consideration by the Air Force of “the specific facts and circumstances.” The denial said that it was based on the need for a healthy military and that, “less restrictive means of protecting [members of the military] from COVID-19 are unavailable[.]” The Officer was also told that “[c]ontinued refusal [of the vaccine] will result in involuntary reassignment” to the Ready Reserve with no pay, no benefits, and no regular responsibilities. The other choices were to take the vaccine or retire, and the officer chose the latter.

Why Medical Exemptions but No Religious Exemptions?

Stating that the Officer has clearly been forced to choose between their religious belief and their livelihood, Self opined that he was ruling for them based on both the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment. In a key point, Self noted that at least 3,300 Air Force members have gotten medical or administrative vaccine exemptions and that this has not prevented the Force from functioning properly. Based on this, combined with the fact that the Officer has been allowed to work until retirement using masking, etc., there is no compelling reason to deny them accommodations.

Air Force’s Process Mere “Theater”

The combination of the Officer’s natural immunity with other preventatives, “begs the question: Does a COVID-19 vaccine really provide more sufficient protection?” Self points out that folks can get COVID-19 even if vaccinated, and this is another reason that the Air Force’s position is wrong. Self, “easily finds that the Air Force’s process to protect religious rights is both illusory and insincere” and purely “theater.” In conclusion, Self ruled in favor of the Officer and banned any action, including forced retirement, that is adverse to the Officer based on their decision to decline the vaccine. The court’s injunction decision will be in place pending completion of the case.