Among these advocates is Richard Jaffe, a litigator specializing in health care. He has long been a proponent of medical freedom. On July 24, a First Amended Complaint in the case of Children’s Health Defense v. Hegseth, No. 1:25-cv-04363-ACR, was filed at the federal court in Washington, D.C.
As stated by Children’s Health Defense (CHD), the complaint claims that “service members were harmed by the U.S. Air Force when it failed to respond to their requests for religious exemptions, denied deployment opportunities and launched disciplinary actions against them.”
What prompted this amended complaint? To gain further insight into the filing, American Family News spoke to Davis Younts, a retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel and former Judge Advocate General (JAG) officer, who is also an advocate for service members’ rights.
The complaint lists U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Secretary of the Air Force Troy E. Meink, and Surgeon General of the Air Force John J. Degoes as the defendants. Younts explained, the initial strategy for the legal action involved filing a lawsuit against the Department of War for implementing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) childhood immunization schedule, which is required for new military recruits.
Younts and numerous others contend that there is insufficient scientific evidence to back the schedule for new recruits. Consider the flu vaccine, for instance. “Unless you can show it’s reasonably necessary, how do you justify a lawful order to get the vaccine?” he questioned.
“With these types of orders in place, it becomes extremely difficult for someone who wants to join the military to file any kind of waiver or religious accommodation,” Younts shared. This underscores a reality faced by many in the armed forces.
On his website, Jaffe wrote:
“The treatment of religious accommodation requests reflected in this case is part of a broader pattern across the military. This lawsuit seeks to expose, challenge, and remedy these failures. It is no small irony that our warriors who have dedicated their lives to protecting the freedoms of us all must fight their own government to protect their own.”
In light to this systemic issue, Younts shared his own personal experience of entering the COVID-19 era, not as a new recruit, but as a nearly 20-year JAG officer. He submitted a request for religious accommodation and subsequently an appeal, believing in good faith that his appeal would be handled correctly according to the law. Without a federal judge granting a class-action temporary restraining order (TRO) in 2022 in Doster v. Kendall to prevent Air Force and Space Force from discharging airmen who were requesting religious accommodations, he would have been forced to leave the military along with thousands of others. “The system is broken,” he stated.
This sentiment is echoed in the lawsuit. Early on, the challenge was the lack of named plaintiffs. “Who’s willing to be named in a lawsuit against the Department of War that’s trying to get a waiver or religious accommodation to join the military?”
The solution was Children’s Health Defense, a public interest nonprofit that was willing to bring the litigation. “They’ve since repositioned that the litigation to include not just those seeking entry into the service, but also those who are facing challenges with the military’s failure to appropriately process religious accommodation requests when it comes to vaccines in particular.”
These service members include Maj. Brennan Schilperoort, Lt. Col. Benjamin Leiby and Staff Sgt. Brittany Puckett. Schilperoort’s narrative garnered nationwide attention in March, following the Air Force’s decision to retract its disciplinary measures against him. Conversely, in the instances of Leiby and Puckett, the Air Force has yet to provide a conclusive ruling on their requests for exemptions, despite their numerous resubmissions and appeals.
“What’s interesting,” said Younts, “is that the religious accommodation process was not broken before COVID.” Many service members had received religious exemptions for various vaccines; however, since the onset of COVID, the Department of Defense has adopted a stance of essentially denying all requests for religious accommodations for any vaccines, regardless of the circumstances.
“They're not following the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and the posture has shifted from ‘can we accommodate’ to ‘how can we deny,’” he lamented, adding, “That’s not what the law requires.”
Thus, the outcome of the lawsuit could set a crucial precedent, not only for the military but for the broader conversation around medical autonomy and religious freedom in America.
