Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden

Case docket

Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden — S.D. Tex., Galveston Division, No. 3:21-cv-00356

Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden — 9 court filings in the archive, mostly from U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division, filed between December 21, 2021 and June 3, 2023. Among them: 2 responses or replies, 1 complaint and 1 notice.

Case facts

CourtU.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division (6 filings); U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (en banc) (3 filings)
Filings9 public filings
Filed2021-12-21 – 2023-06-03
Document typesresponses or replies (2), complaint (1), notice (1), opinion (1)
Original PDFs9 of 9

Case summary

Feds for Medical Freedom, Local 918 of the American Federation of Government Employees, Highland Engineering, Inc. and individual federal employees and contractors filed this action on December 21, 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division, No. 3:21-cv-00356. It challenged Executive Order 14043, which required federal employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19, and Executive Order 14042, which imposed the same requirement on federal contractors. The complaint pleads seven counts: two of ultra vires action, non-delegation under Article I, three under the Administrative Procedure Act, and one for declaratory judgment. On January 21, 2022 the court enjoined Executive Order 14043 nationwide and denied relief as to Executive Order 14042. The Fifth Circuit, sitting en banc, affirmed on March 23, 2023. The government states that the President revoked both orders effective May 12, 2023.

Case at a glance

PartiesPlaintiffs: Feds for Medical Freedom; Local 918, American Federation of Government Employees; Highland Engineering, Inc.; Raymond A. Beebe, Jr.; John Armbrust; and further individual plaintiffs named in the complaint's caption. Defendants: Joseph R. Biden, Jr., in his official capacity as President of the United States; the United States of America; and the Secretaries, Administrators and departments and agencies named in the caption in their official capacities
Court and docketU.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division, No. 3:21-cv-00356 (Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown); on appeal, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 22-40043, decided on rehearing en banc
ProgramNot named in the filings on this page. The measures at issue are Executive Order 14043, the COVID-19 vaccination requirement for federal employees, and Executive Order 14042, the requirement for federal contractors
ClaimsSeven counts: Count One and Count Two, ultra vires acts as to the employee mandate and the contractor mandate; Count Three, violation of Article I of the Constitution (non-delegation); Counts Four and Five, violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (arbitrary and capricious); Count Six, violation of the APA (acts not in accordance with law); Count Seven, declaratory judgment. The prayer for relief asks the court to hold unlawful and set aside both mandates and to enjoin all defendants except the President from enforcing them
Disposition or statusPreliminary injunction granted in part. On January 21, 2022 the district court granted the motion as to Executive Order 14043, enjoining all defendants except the President from implementing or enforcing it until the case is resolved on the merits, with nationwide applicability, and denied it as to Executive Order 14042, which was already subject to a nationwide injunction. The Fifth Circuit en banc affirmed the district court's order on March 23, 2023, each party to bear its own costs, and the mandate issued May 15, 2023. The government's opposition of June 2, 2023 states that the President revoked both executive orders effective May 12, 2023 and asks that the case remain stayed; no order on that motion is on this page
Status checked2026-09-23 · against DOJ press releases through 2026-09-22; court docket not yet read

What did the district court decide?

In a memorandum opinion and order of January 21, 2022, Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown granted in part and denied in part the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction: denied as to Executive Order 14042, because that order was already subject to a nationwide injunction, and granted as to Executive Order 14043, so that all defendants except the President were enjoined from implementing or enforcing it until the case is resolved on the merits. The court gave the injunction nationwide applicability and required no bond.

What did the Fifth Circuit decide?

Sitting en banc in No. 22-40043, the court held on March 23, 2023 that it had jurisdiction over pre-enforcement challenges to the federal-employee vaccine mandate and affirmed the district court's order on the merits, with concurrences and dissents recorded in the judgment. The judgment ordered that the district court's judgment is affirmed and that each party bear its own costs on appeal.

What is the status of the case in the district court?

The government's memorandum of June 2, 2023 opposes the plaintiffs' motion to lift the stay and for summary judgment. It states that the Fifth Circuit's mandate issued on May 15, 2023, that on May 9, 2023 the President revoked Executive Orders 14043 and 14042 effective 12:01 a.m. on May 12, 2023, and that the Solicitor General had not yet determined whether to seek further review. No ruling on that motion appears among the filings on this page.

Summary written from the documents on this page; every sentence is sourced.

Filings

9 public filings from this case, in filing-date order.

  1. ComplaintComplaint · PDF
  2. Notice of Supplemental Authorities — Feds for Med. Freedom v…Notice · PDF
  3. Govt Response to Notice of Supplemental AuthorityPDF
  4. Memorandum Opinion and OrderOpinion · PDF
  5. En Banc Brief for AppelleesPDF
  6. En Banc Judgment — Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden (5th Cir.)PDF
  7. En Banc Opinion — Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden (5th Cir.)PDF
  8. Opposition to Motion to Lift StayResponse or reply · PDF
  9. Reply Brief — Motion to Lift Stay — Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden (5th Cir.)Response or reply · PDF

More documents from this docket

6 more documents from the same CourtListener docket (gov.uscourts.txsd.1855108) are in the archive but are not among the 9 filings above.

  1. Federal Contractor Order For Conference AndOrder
  2. Motion For Preliminary Injunction: III. The Public Interests And Equities Weigh In Favor Of v. SecResponse or reply
  3. Notice of AppealNotice
  4. Defendants’ Unopposed Motion To StayMotion
  5. Plaintiffs’ Opposed Motion To Lift Stay, Grant SummaryJudgment
  6. Notice Of Supplemental Authority: ECF No. 53. v. Biden, No. 22-10007Notice

Other cases in the archive from U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division.

Court, dates and docket numbers are as recorded on the filings.

Back to top