Friday, August 12, 2022

List of Law Suits filed by Federal Employees regarding the "Vaccination" Mandate Executive Order

This page is mostly to keep track of the federal employee mandate cases. From what I can tell, no one is keeping a list of those cases and reporting on it is very infrequent. I also keep some track of the other sister mandates (1. Military , 2. Federal Contractor, 3. Federal Employees, 4. CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services), 5. OSHA, 6. Head Start. I also have some honorable mentions at the bottom which don't involve any of the six sisters.

I. Federal Employee mandate cases
  1. Scylla, a Six-headed Beast
    Brnovich v. Biden, filed by Attorney General of Arizona, on 9-14, No. 21-1568 (D. Ariz.) ("Defendants’ imposition of vaccine mandates on U.S. citizens and lawfully employed aliens, but not on unauthorized aliens at the border or already present in the United States, constitutes discrimination on the basis of national origin and alienage in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.") See his 10-22 motion for TRO ; Order granting leave to file amended complaint and new motion for preliminary injunction 11-10; Amended Complaint;  Motion for Preliminary Injunction 11-19
  2. GREGG COSTIN, et al. v. Biden filed by Michael Yoder on 9-23 (D.C.), 1:21-cv-02484
  3. Foley v. Biden, filed by David Foley and Daniel Flickinger on 9-29 (Northern District of Texas)  4:21-cv-01098-O, See Defendant's Response, the Judge's Order, and Plaintiff's Response to that Order, and Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Motion; Plaintiff's second motion to amend and draft amended complaint; Defendant's request for extension of time to file answer to original complaint in light of potential amendment 11-22Plaintiff's opposition to Defendant's request for extension 11-23; Defendant's Reply re extension of time 11-24; Order granting motion for extension in part 11-29; Defendant's opposition to motion for leave to amend 12-3; Plaintiff's reply to Defendant's opposition 12-6-21; Defendant's notice of supplemental authority (Order in McCray); Plaintiff's Notice of supplemental authority (Cochran v. SEC); Defendant's Second Notice of Supplemental Authority 12-23 ( Donovan v. Vance, No. 4:21-cv-5148-TOR, ECF No. 58, at 10-14 (W.D. Wa. Dec. 17, 2021); AFGE Local 501 v. Biden, No. 21-23828-CIV, ECF No. 33, at 13-18 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 22, 2021); Plaintiff's Second Notice of Supplemental Authority 12-23 (Texas v. Becerra, No. 2:21- CV-229, (N.D. Tex. Dec. 16, 2021) and Florida v. Nelson, No. 8:21-cv-2524-SDM-TGW, (M.D. Fla. Dec. 22, 2021)); Plaintiff's third notice of supplemental authority; Plaintiff's fourth notice of supplemental authority (in light of injunction in F4MF); Joint Status Report,  Order staying case pending Feds for Medical Freedom Injunction resolution
  4. Brass v Biden, filed pro se, 1:21-cv-02778-MEH (D. Colo.) October 15, 2021; copies of FOIA requests sent by Brass
  5. ALTSCHULD ET AL v. RAIMONDO et al  (D.C.) filed by the Federal Practice Group on 10-19,   1:2021cv02779, Defendant Response to motion for preliminary injunction ;exhibits11-3; Order denying preliminary injunction 11-8
  6. Rydie et al v. Biden et al Employee A v. Biden, filed by Jonathan Bolls on October 19, 2021 (Maryland) 8:2021cv02696, see motion for TRO; Biden response in opposition 11-12; Plaintiff Reply; Order Denying TRO 11-19
  7. Church v. Biden, filed filed by Michael Yoder on 10-24 (D.C.)1:21-cv-02815, as reported by Under Cover DC; Plaintiffs’ application for a temporary restraining order;  opposition from the DefendantsPlaintiff's Response 11-3; Memorandum Order denying preliminary injunction 11-8
  8. Smith v Biden, 1:21-cv-19457-CPO-SAK filed 10-29 (NJ); brief in support motion for injunction with exhibits; opposition to motion for injunction 11-5; Reply to motion in opposition 11-6;  Order denying injunction 11-8
  9. AFGE Local 501 et al v. Biden et al filed by Mark Berkowitz on behalf of AFGE Local 501 and Council of Prison Locals CPL 33 on 10-30 (Southern Florida) 1:21-cv-23828-JAL, Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Order denying preliminary injunction (11-15) 
  10. McCray v. Biden filed on 11-1-21; Order denying motion for TRO dismissing complaint without prejudice (12-7) 
  11. James Joseph Rodden, et al. v. Dr. Anthony Fauci, et al. filed by John J. Vecchione, Jenin Younes, and Harriet Hageman of New Civil Liberties Alliance and Robert Henneke of Texas Public Policy Foundation on November 5, 2021 (Southern District of Texas) 3:21-cv-00317; Defendant's response in opposition to motion for preliminary injunction, exhibits; Plaintiff's reply and exhibitOrder denying injunction 11-27-21
  12. Donovan v. Vance, 4:21-cv-05148 (E.D. Wash.), filed by Nathan Arnold and Simon Peter Serrano for the Silent Majority Foundation on 11-15 (one federal employee, others contractors)
  13. Payne v. Biden, filed by Reed Rubinstein for America First Legal Foundation on November 22, 2021 (D.C.)  1:21-cv-03077; Plaintiff's motion for Summary Judgment (Nov 24); Memo in support of motion for summary judgment; Defendant's motion for extension to answer MSJ; Plaintiff's opposition to Defendant's motion 12-23
  14. MacGregor & Bjerken v. Federal Agency Heads, 21-cv-142 (D. Mont.) filed on 11-17, Brief in support of TRO, filed by Chris Gallus and Abby Moscatel  Order voluntarily dismissing case 11-29
  15.  AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES COUNCIL OF PRISON LOCALS 33 and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES LOCAL 2018 v. DIRECTOR KIRAN AHUJA, JOSEPH R. BIDEN, Attorney General MERRICK B. GARLAND and LLOYD AUSTIN, filed by Bruce L. Castor, Jr. Michael T. van der Veen on behalf of Council 33 and Local 2018 on November 23, 2021 (E.D. Pa) 2:2021cv05172
  16. Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden et al., filed by TRENT MCCOTTER, JONATHAN BERRY,  MICHAEL BUSCHBACHER of BOYDEN GRAY & ASSOCIATES December 21, 2021  (S.D. Tx)  3:21-cv-00356, motion for injunction part 1, part 2, Order accepting Plaintiff's proposed briefing schedule; Defendants' Response in oppo to injunction; Plaintiffs' reply; Plaintiff's supplement in light of Supreme Court in OSHA and CMSTranscript of hearing (1-13-22); Defendant's Response to supplemental authority (1-18-22); Nationwide Injunction (1-21-22); Notice of appeal 
  17. VIERBUCHEN v. BIDEN, Case 0:22-cv-00001-NDF, filed 01/04/22 (Wyoming) by John Knepper and Andrew Block for America First Legal  
  18. Doe v. Austin (Feds for Medical Freedom) filed 1-14-21(M.D. Fla) by Nick Whitney, Carol A. Thompson, John J. Michaels of Federal Practice Group See covereage: 

II. Military only (August 24, 2021 Department of Defense Mandate)
  1. Robert v. Austin, filed by Todd S. Callender and Dale Saran on 8-17 (Colorado) 1:2021cv02228, Motion for preliminary injunction 11-2, Exhibit 17, Exhibit 18
  2. Doe v. Austin, filed by Ibrahim Reyes, Brandon Johnson, and Travis Miller (Defending the Republic) on 10-6 (N.D. Fla.)  3:21-cv-01211-AW-HTC (Military only, no federal employees), see Defendant Response Memo of Defendant Response, and Plaintiff's Reply and other Reply; Order denying Preliminary Injunction (But also finding that service members can't be required to take BioNTech)
  3. Navy Seal, et al v. Biden filed by Liberty Counsel on 10-15 (Middle District of Florida) 8:21-cv-02429; Order denying prelim injunction, deferring judgment in part (military only), and ordering information about exemption requests provided on schedule (finding that accommodations process might be guise as plaintiff suggest - military only); Defendant's opposition to class action with attached affidavits of military involved in the denial accommodation process 12-3
  4. Navy Seals 1-26 et al v Biden and Austin et al, filed First Liberty associated attorneys Kelly J. Shackelford, Jeffrey C. Mateer, Hiram S. Sasser, III, David J. Hacker, Michael D. Berry, Justin Butterfield Texas, Roger Byron, Heather Gebelin Hacker, Andrew B. Stephens, and Jordan E. Pratt on November 9, 2021 (Northern District of Texas) 4:21-cv-01236-O; Amicus America First Legal Foundation;  motion for preliminary injunction 11-24; brief in support motion injunction 11-24; order denying motion for lack of notice to counsel (none filed NOA yet) and providing further instruction 11-24 ; 12-10 defendant's response to motion for injunction12-17 Plaintiff's reply  supplemental evidence 12-23 (complaint of commander re ruse process); supplemental evidence 12-24 (denial of travel authorization for medical treatment); 1-3-22 Order Enjoining
  5. ?1:21-cv-03053-UNA FRETZ v. BIDEN et al, filed 11-17-21 (info not available at this time)
  6. Abbott v. Biden, Case 6:22-cv-00003 Filed 01/04/22 (National Guard)
  7. Airforce Officer v Austin, Case 5:22-cv-00009-TES filed, 01/06/22 by Michael R. Hirsh and others with St. Thomas More Society, (M.D. Ga)
***See also this excellent memo from an Area Defense Counsel 1-19-22***

III. Federal Contractors only (Executive Order 14042)
  1. State of Texas v. Biden, filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on October 29, 2021 (Southern District of Texas) 3:21-cv-00309 
  2. State of Georgia et al v. Biden, filed by representative for States of Georgia, Alabama, Idaho, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia (Southern Georgia) 1:21-tc-05000  
  3. Kentucky v Biden Judge Tatenhove's order on 11-30, enjoining the federal contractor mandate in 3 states.
  4. VANDERSTELT v. Biden, filed 1:22-cv-00005 ECF No. 1, filed 01/04/22 (W. Michigan) by Sheng Li, John J. Vecchione, and Jenin Younes for New Civil Liberties Alliance (NECLA)
    Louisiana v. Becerra (dec     1)
   Missouri v. Biden Judge Schelp's order on 11-29, enjoining the federal healthcare worker mandate in 10 states. 

1/13/2221A240Biden v. Missouri

1/13/2221A244NFIB v. OSHA

VI. Head Start
  • December 31, 2021, Memorandum Opinion and Order issued by U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix in Texas v. Becerra, Case No. 5:21-cv-00300-H, Doc. 42 (N.D. Tex) 
  • January 1, 2022, Memorandum Order issued by Judge Terry Doughty in Louisiana v. Becerra 3:21-cv-04370-TAD-KDM (Doc. 15)  

Honorable Mentions

On the issue of the time and forum to challenge the constitutionality of laws and orders when there exists an administrative scheme
    Cochran v. Security and Exchange Commission, No. 19-10396 (5th Cir., December 13, 2021) 
In Cochran, the court recognized that a rule set forth in Elgin v. Department of Treasury, 567 U.S.         1 (2012), which acts to preclude certain plaintiffs from seeking redress in federal district court in             favor of administrative adjudication, “cannot be absolute.” Cochran at 20.                         Cochran v. SEC - New Civil Liberties Alliance (

On the issue of the efficacy of the injections

Halgren v. City of Naperville, 21-cv-05039

Contrary to Defendants’ claim, the nature of the disease and vaccines involved in Jacobson (and thus the legitimate government interest furthered by the legislation) present sharp factual distinctions from the current case. Unlike COVID-19, which presents an infection fatality rate range of ostensibly 0.0-1.63 percent, the smallpox pandemic killed tens of millions with an infection fatality rate of 30 percent, exceeding the death toll of World War I and II combined, and leaving even its survivors permanently scarred, blind or disabled. Likewise, the Jacobson pandemic involved higher transmissibility “attack rates” (i.e. the rate of contraction among the at-risk populations), and unlike the vaccines for COVID-19 (which are designed to mitigate symptomatic infection in the person vaccinated), the available vaccine in Jacobson was, in fact, a sterilizing vaccine that affirmatively killed the virus and prevented transmission within the community at large. Factually, this case isn’t Jacobson.

 " most current evidence …confirms no proven differential in the transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus based upon vaccination status for those infected"

“court examined the record evidence on the issue presented and finds that Plaintiffs…made a preliminary showing that that natural immunity equals the material benefits of vaccine-induced protection alone.”


On the travel mandate (masks not vaccines)

Health Freedom Defense Fund, Inc. et al v. Biden et al, 8:2021cv01693 (M.D. FL) filed July 12, 2021 by Brant Hadaway and George Wentz, Jr.; Amended Complaint (filed 12-13-21); Answer to Amended Complaint (1-6-21)

Wednesday, February 2, 2022

Friday, January 21, 2022

Numerous Federal Officials Enjoined from Enforcing Federal Employee Vaccine Mandate

The tireless efforts of the good people at Feds for Medical Freedom have paid off with a huge win today in securing an injunction. As we know, these fights are never over until they are over, and we can expect more ups and downs, but this was a big day. 

 The order and filings are linked here:

Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden et al., filed by TRENT MCCOTTER, JONATHAN BERRY,  MICHAEL BUSCHBACHER of BOYDEN GRAY & ASSOCIATES December 21, 2021  (S.D. Tx)  3:21-cv-00356, motion for injunction part 1, part 2, Order accepting Plaintiff's proposed briefing schedule; Defendants' Response in oppo to injunction; Plaintiffs' reply; Plaintiff's supplement in light of Supreme Court in OSHA and CMSTranscript of hearing (1-13-22); Nationwide Injunction (1-21-22)

Monday, January 17, 2022

March for Life on January 21, Rally for Freedom on January 23

This could be a huge year for the Pro-Life movement. I cannot make it, but my prayers will be with those marching on January 21.

A massive rally is being held two days later in protest of the injection mandates. Feds for Medical Freedom will be there and some of the strongest voices in the freedom movement will be there, including RFK Jr., Dr. Malone, and Dr. McCullough. Again, I wish I could be there, but my prayers will be with the rally attendees. 

 The Joe that Americans voted for promised not to impose mandates. We seem to ended up with a different Joe. We can't be silent about it. I encourage anyone who can go to go, and those who cannot go to support them.

Wednesday, January 12, 2022

Sudden Deaths in Tarrant County Update

In previous posts, I asked if anyone was even trying to keep track of vaccine deaths and I noted the rise in "sudden deaths" that seems to have marked 2021. To be clear, I don't know why there has been a rise in sudden deaths. 

Covid-19 has disrupted many aspects of American life. Between lockdowns, telework, life under a mask, and life under fear, Americans are more unhealthy than ever. Americans are exercising less and socializing (in real life) less at the same time that they are drinking more, using more drugs, murdering each other more, and dying in car accidents more. Perhaps all of these factors have something to do with the rise in sudden deaths. 

If it hadn't been for Covid-19 and Covid-19 "vaccines" my chief culprits for the rise in sudden death would probably have been energy drinks (it seems like at some point in recent years we saw an odd anything-goes approach to their regulation and a dramatic rise in their consumption), vaping (could be fine, but it is fairly new), or illegal drugs. 

But, when the majority of the entire population has been injected with a new technology, that technology should be considered suspect #1 for evaluating any medical trends that follow.

To rule out suspect #1, I looked at data from the Medical Examiner's office and identified thirteen decedents (out of about 1300) whose deaths seemed most likely to have been the result of the "vaccinations" (based on listed cause of death, age and date of death). I asked the Medical Examiner's office for records of their "vaccinations". The Medical Examiner's office explained that it did not have such records and so I requested their autopsy reports.

So far I have received nine autopsy reports. Only one includes vaccine status. That case involved a 30-year old man whose medical history included asthma. According to the Medical Examiner, he was "vaccinated" but the Medical Examiner has no information as to when he was vaccinated or by what product. Prior to his death, he experienced extreme coughing, vomiting, and diarrhea. He tested negative for Covid-19. He had no history of drug or alcohol problems. He died in late August, 2021. The cause of death is listed as "Sudden Death with a history of asthma."

I would feel a lot more comfortable with what is happening if someone could tell me the "vaccine" that he took, its batch number, and the date(s) that he took it. I would feel even more comfortable if they had already looked into this issue before I asked about it.

I have similar concerns about the others whose autopsy reports I reviewed, I just don't know whether they received a "vaccine" (although the odds are that at least 5 of them had).

The best way to assure those of us who are "vaccine hesitant" would be to provide us with all of the data so that we could reassure ourselves.