Legal Settlement Exonerates Navy Sailors Kicked Out over COVID Vaccine

A recent settlement protecting Navy sailors from being negatively affected by COVID policies in the future is the latest example of how the consequences from the COVID-19 pandemic are still unfolding — specifically in terms of how the military dealt with it. It’s been estimated that roughly “80,000 to 100,000 service members — both active-duty and reservists … were impacted by the mandate.” And as retired Army Major Chase Spears previously expressed, many servicemembers began to wonder if “those who made such un-American policy decisions can be trusted going forward.”

Reportedly, over “8,400 troops were kicked out of the military for refusing the [COVID] vaccine,” which became a requirement for all U.S. servicemembers under the Biden administration’s Department of Defense (DOD) in August of 2021. Despite the consequences, many in the military continued to fight against the vaccine mandate — be it for personal or religious reasons. In 2022, President Joe Biden repealed the mandate DOD Secretary Lloyd Austin put in place. And in November of 2023, the Army sent out letters to several troops who were discharged for not taking the shot requesting for their return.

As a result, each branch suffered from tremendous recruitment shortages. According to 2023 reports, “the Air Force fell roughly 2,700 airmen short, the Army was 15,000 soldiers short, the Navy missed their goal by over 7,450 sailors, and the Coast Guard by about 4,800. The military as a whole missed their recruitment target by 41,000 recruits.” Over the last couple of years, different branches of the military have taken different approaches in attempts to grow in numbers, the letters sent by the Army in 2023 being one example. But the most recent win for soldiers seeking reconciliation was the legal settlement announced Wednesday — at least for Navy sailors.

As summarized by guest host and former Congressman Jody Hice on Thursday’s episode of “Washington Watch,” the settlement “ensures that Navy service members who refuse[d] to have the COVID vaccine for religious reasons … now have an opportunity to have both their records corrected and their careers protected.” Additionally, “The Navy also agreed to post a statement affirming the Navy’s respect for religious service members, to provide more training for commanders who review religious accommodation requests, revise a policy related to accommodation requests that was actually changed during the mandate, and they also had to pay $1.5 million in attorney fees.”

The settlement came as a result of some “sailors who filed a lawsuit over the service’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate, ending a nearly four-year saga that pitted Navy SEALs and other service members against their commander in chief,” Military.com reported. Concerning the case, the First Liberty Institute (FLI), who represented the sailors, shared on their website, “This case was always about maintaining careers.” As such, Hice asked, what does this settlement mean for those who were affected by COVID? To give further insight, Danielle Runyon, FLI’s senior counsel and chair of their military affairs portfolio, joined Hice on the episode.

“We had a mission to protect the careers of the over 4,300 sailors that we represent,” Runyan said. “[W]e went in with a strategy, and we came out being able to maintain all of their careers and to allow them to continue to serve without the issues that they faced” previously. She continued, “[R]ecords are going to be corrected [and] promotion boards are going to have information provided to them so that these people will not have to look back at the impact and the harm that they suffered.” Rather, “they’re going to be able to go forward with their careers and … serve in the way that they did pre-COVID.”

Hice emphasized that FLI has been involved with helping servicemembers rectify COVID repercussions for a couple years now, and Runyan explained how they were able to do so because “immediately, and even before the mandate came down, the messaging was really negative” and “punitive” concerning the response to the pandemic. “[P]eople just saw the writing on the wall,” she stated.

Because of that, Runyan noted, “[W]e were kind of prepared for those who wanted to submit religious accommodation requests.” In a sense, she added, “[W]e were kind of gearing up for that.” And what started as a potential lawsuit turned into FLI seeing “how the discrimination was just across the board, across the services. We had a number of Navy SEALS that had come to us and said, … ‘Our careers are in jeopardy, and we don’t know what to do.’ So, instantly, we decided to represent 35 of them.”

And from that point, FLI was “able to obtain the first relief in the nation out of any of the other cases that were filed,” Runyan emphasized. Ultimately, “We were able to put the stop to the bleeding to save their careers.” That was the beginning of FLI helping thousands of sailors, setting “the stage for all the other cases,” which is what Runyan hopes this settlement will do. “Not only will this benefit the 4,300 clients that we have, but we really think this is going to help the other service branches as well.”

After all, she argued, when you are able to make “a significant impression on the Navy [and] on Navy leadership, … how does that not extend to other service branches?” Because really, “if one service branch is recognizing that there was significant harm here, and that things needed to be corrected, it’s undoubted that the other service branches are recognizing that as well.” 

As Hice pointed out, “[E]very branch has fallen horribly below their recruitment goals, and … [it] has to come back to the fact that their religious accommodations, this whole debacle through the COVID [pandemic], … is a huge part of it.” And that’s not even considering the other military shortcomings such as the withdrawal from Afghanistan and all “the woke policies being forced upon” soldiers, Hice noted. “I would anticipate,” he suspected, “that when things like this start getting corrected, potentially we’re going to see a turnaround in some of those recruitment goals, as well.”

Regarding FLI’s clients, Hice asked, “What kind of response have you received from various servicemembers?” Mostly, Runyan responded, they have received “tremendous” gratitude. “I mean, we had people who were ready to retire, who almost lost everything that they had sacrificed over the past 19 years to 20 years of their careers.” But through tireless effort, “[W]e were able to protect those service members.”

Even now, she noted, some servicemembers “still have claims that they can bring in” to court. “But in terms of the relief, … we achieved everything that we possibly could have out of this case,” which is “a significant victory.” Ultimately, Runyan stressed, “It was a long, hard-fought battle over the past three years, but every step of the way we achieved excellent case law precedent. And now, a settlement agreement that people can walk away with and have in their hands to say, ‘My career is protected and here are the reasons why.’”