Objection to Settlement Agreement and Release of All Claims — U.S. Navy SEALs 1-26 v. Biden (Dkt. 302)

Summary

A former LT, USN, identified as Brianne G., files an Objection to Settlement Agreement and Release of All Claims in U.S. Navy SEALs 1-26 v. Biden, Document 302, filed 07/17/24. The objection says that $1.5 million is not sufficient compensation for class members' attorneys and lists six conditions, including a fund of at least $200,000,000 funded by the United States Navy and an official reprimand for Admiral Gilday, Admiral Nowell and Admiral Waters. The writer then gives a personal account of a ship deployment, a religious accommodation request, time spent at a shore command and the decision to submit a resignation, separating in May of 2024. The objection is dated July 15, 2024.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors. Pages 6 and 7 of 7 are not shown because the text could not be recognized reliably.

Case 4:21-cv-01236-O Document 302 Filed 07/17/24 Pageiof7 PagelD 8375

OBJECTION TO SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS In
U.S. Navy. SEALS 1-26 v. Biden, 4:22-cv-01236-O (N.D. Tex.)

To: United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
From: Angelopouios, Brianne G., former LT, USN

As a class member, | object to the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of this
Settlement Agreement for the following reasons:

The repair of harms is not adequate because it only forces the Navy to correct limited
administrative records which fails to restore the harms that fall outside this limited definition or
the harms done to those class members no longer in the service.

The settlement does not adequately compensate class attorneys, who were forced to
litigate with an incredibly limited budget against the significant resources of the federal
government who weaponized citizens’ (including class members’) tax dollars against them.

The Settlement does not compensate class members in any way whatsoever, despite
many class members enduring significant financial, mental health, and medical expenses as a
result of defendants actions.

Finally, the Settlement does not deter the Navy from engaging in similar unlawful
practices in the future because 1) the remedial actions the Navy is directed to take are completely
symbolic and 2) the Settlement Agreement does not hold accountable those Navy leaders who
are most responsible for violating the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First
Amendment of the Constitution.

The defendants actions in violating the rights of class members had an individualized
impact and therefore must be remedied by individualized relief and compensation. I do not
consent to this settlement and will object unless the following six conditions are added to the
Settlement Agreement.

i) Full backpay must be provided automatically (i.e. without their having to request it),
for all class members who were involuntarily separated from the Navy for refusing
the COVID-19 shots after filing a religious accommodation.

2) All service members who were involuntarily separated, left the Navy voluntarily, or
retired before statutory retirement age, after filing a religious accommodation, must
be automatically G.e. without their having to request it), offered full reinstatement to
their previous ranks and positions with both the pay and seniority they would
otherwise have been entitled to had they remained in the Navy.

3) $1.5 million is not sufficient compensation for class members’ attorneys.

-. 4), The Settlement Agreement provides zero compensation for class members to deal
\c) with the significant financial, physical, emotional, and mental toll for the ordeal they
Case 4:21-cv-01236-O Document 302 Filed 07/17/24 Page2of7 PagelD 8376

underwent at the hands of the defendants. A fund must be established to support the
medical, mental health, and unemployment claims of class members. This fund must
be funded by the United States Navy with a minimum of $200,000,000. The fund
must provide a method for class members to make claims for a minimum of five
years.

5) Admiral Gilday, Admiral Nowell, and Admiral Waters must be held accountable for
their part in violating the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First
Amendment of the Constitution. All three must be issued an official reprimand and be
barred from federal service or contracting with the federal government for a minimum
of seven years.

6) Wide latitude must be provided to the Board For the Correction of Naval Records
(BCNR) for class members to seek relief over defendant’s actions related to the
COVID-19 mandates. BCNR cases which do not result in satisfactory relief for class
members shall remain actionable as claims under this Settlement and relief may be
sought by class members in subsequent federal court cases.

The personal impact that the COVID-19 shot mandate had on the lives of my family
members, and on my own life, goes beyond what I will say here. For me, the impact
began while deployed from fall 2020 to summer of 2021, my ship was one of the first to
be offered the COVID-19 shot. It was not mandatory at that time, though my
Commanding Officer, Executive Officer, and Command Master Chief, along with many
others in leadership positions onboard, essentially made it a soft mandate. They actively
pressured the Marines and Sailors onboard, and pursued explanations from those of us
who declined the shot. We were not provided with the opportunity to ask questions, and
any answers we did get from the medical staff were not sufficient. Having spent the last 6
months in a pseudo-quarantine environment on a very busy operational deployment, we
had limited access to information about the shots. We were unable to have informed
consent. I remember calling my husband in tears while we were moored in Bahrain (only
for the purpose of receiving the shots and quarantining), telling him we were being told to
get the shot and we didn’t feel like we could say no. I thank God that my husband stood
by me and gave me courage to stand up for myself and my faith and say no in that
moment.

We had spent nearly 6 months without a port cail at this point and were told only those
who received the shot would be allowed off the ship upon reaching the next port, Guam.
We were also told that upon return to home port, those of us who did not receive the shot
would not be allowed to leave the immediate area to see our families during post-
deployment standdown, while those who had would be unrestricted in travel. This was
used constantly as a tool to pressure us. What’s worse, leaders and peers spoke openly
about our “vaccine status” and called us selfish, stating that we did not care about how
our choice was “putting others in danger.” In the months following the initial shot roll-
out, many members of the crew were pressured to get the shot, which they said they
would not have otherwise received. | was counseled multiple times by medical and was
made to explain why I did not want the shot. My name was on a hitlist that was routinely
Case 4:21-cv-01236-O Document 302 Filed 07/17/24 Page 3of7 PagelD 8377

updated and sent out to the crew so that everyone could see who had not yet received the
shot, all before the mandate was even formalized. For a time, only those of us who were
“unvaccinated,” (per the public hitlist) were made to wear masks while at work—our
scarlet letters. During times of “increased risk” of outbreaks, the entire crew would be
required to wear a mask if even one person onboard was “unvaccinated.” This created
animosity toward those of us who had chosen not to receive it.

In August of 2021, three months after returning home from deployment, the COVID-19
mandate was placed in effect. Several days prior to the mandate announcement, I had
been contacted by our Medical Officer, asking if | was going to get the shot if it became
mandatory or if I planned to submit an exemption. I told her I planned to submit a
religious accommodation. We returned home from an exercise on August 26, 2021. All
Sailors onboard who had received the shot prior to then were given the next day, Friday,
August 27", off. All who had not were to report to a specific medical facility to receive it,
as per our Medical Officer’s instructions. | informed her that I would not be receiving it
and that I would be submitting a religious accommodation package.

I spent the next 7 months in limbo as the only Sailor (of a crew of 400+) who had not
received the COVID-19 shot. I drafted my request, which was chopped several times by
my Executive Officer and Commanding Officer before I was allowed to submit it. I was,
at that time, the Administrative Officer and Legal Officer onboard. | did not discuss my
“status” with members of the crew, but many of them were aware that I was fighting the
mandate. My Sailors in the administrative department were responsible for
correspondence related to both my religious accommodation request (which I felt was a
private matter, not appropriate for my Sailors to be reading/discussing) as well as my
administrative separation paperwork, which was being prepared as a result of both my
initial accommodation request and my appeal being denied. To say it was embarrassing to
have my business being handled by those that I was meant to lead is an understatement. I
had to put on a bold face for them every day as if it wasn’t an uncomfortable situation for
all of us.

I was told in the beginning of 2022 that I would be processed for administrative
separation. My particular Triad (Commanding Officer, Executive Officer, and Command
Master Chief) were sensitive to my case, as they felt they were losing a good Officer
onboard. They were looking for ways to help me, but they had also warned me several
months earlier, in November, to be prepared for administrative separation. So, from
November 2021 until the mandate was injuncted in March 2022, my husband, our
families, and I were living with incredible uncertainty. I experienced extreme stress,
depression, anxiety, fear, anger, and issues of self-worth. It was miserable not knowing
when I would potentially be not just unemployed but discharged from the military with a
less than honorable discharge. My husband and I knew we wouldn’t be able to afford to
stay in California, where we were stationed. So not only would we be without income,
but we would have to move on very short notice, and we didn’t really know where we
would go. We were on edge for 5 months, waiting for the notice that I would be out of
the Navy. I did not have an appetite, I was made to feel like a pariah, and I] was being
gaslit by some of those around me as if | was making a stupid decision to not “just get it.”
Case 4:21-cv-01236-O Document 302 Filed 07/17/24 Page4of7 PagelD 8378

I did not allow these things to affect my work, however. I remained a dedicated Naval
Officer and was later recommended and selected to become a department head, pending a
decision on whether I would be allowed to serve in an operational capacity. I wanted to
set an example for the Sailors who felt they didn’t have a voice, especially those who
received the shot as a result of senior and peer pressures.

Somehow, my case was delayed enough that I was not separated before the mandate was
injuncted. I was allowed to stay in the Navy, for now, but I was not allowed to continue
along my career path. I had previously been given verbal orders to my top choice duty
station, which would have been closer to family. The hard copy orders were never
released because the Bureau of Naval Personnel (BUPERS) was notified of my case and
held them and me on station until a determination had been made for Sailors in my
position. I was removed from sea duty onboard my ship and sent to a high-vis command
to “wait” until I was either processed out of the Navy or some other decision had been
made. This disrupted my career progression as a Surface Warfare Officer (SWO). My
peers who had received the shot were allowed to move on to their next tours. I spent 22
months at the shore command. A Lieutenant Junior Grade SWO (at the time) is not
supposed to be on shore duty. Being at this command, I served with many senior officers,
many of whom would know it was odd for me to be there unless I had gotten in trouble or
was being kicked out of my community or facing a medical review, etc. This created
questions, and assumptions as to why I was there. This caused me to feel shame. During
this shore tour, the mandate was lifted. Although it was no longer in effect, I still felt the
consequences of the mandate. Sailors, including Officers, nonetheless, would still make
comments suggesting that those of us who chose not to receive the shots did so to be
kicked out because we “didn’t want to be here” as if it was the “easy way out” which is
laughable. I made a choice to stand up for my religious convictions and my health. I did
not choose to be ridiculed and disrespected by leaders, peers, and subordinates for the
“hope” of giving up an honorable discharge and being kicked out. It was absurd and
ignorant to suggest such a thing.

In the summer of 2023, I had lost too much trust in the Navy to wait and see what they
would do with me. I would have been given orders back to sea duty based upon the
“needs of the Navy” which comes with a connotation of being very undesirable. With the
risk being high, and my loss of trust in the organization, I chose to submit my resignation
and leave the Navy, separating in May of 2024. The impact of the mandate is still with
me today. My time in the Navy was short, only five years. Nearly three of those years
were marred by the effects of the COVID-19 mandate, as I waited to see how much
longer I would be allowed to serve in our Navy. I still struggle with the mental health
effects of that time in my life. I do not believe this settlement, even with the items I have
requested above, will fix the damage of the stress I felt. This settlement is most important
for those who have lost everything as a result of the mandate. I consider myself lucky to
have been able to resign on my own terms, even after all 1 went through. I wish I had not
lost trust in the leadership within the US Navy and DoD, or I may have continued to
serve. For those who lost the opportunity to retire, or who lost essential income for
themselves and their families, or just those who had such a strong desire to serve but

were booted anyway, this settlement means everything. Not all of them will want to be
Case 4:21-cv-01236-O Document 302 Filed 07/17/24 Page5of7 PagelD 8379

reinstated, as I imagine many of them feel the way I do. However, I respectfully request
they be given the opportunity to serve their country honorably again.

Signed on this date: July 15, 2024

Brianne G. Angelopoul6$, former LT, USN


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.txnd.355696.302.0.pdf

Size

2,780,404 bytes

SHA-256

7997086e469c9de32669e24c3fa512bfdbbac3a03a6ec02a3c953819210e1a10

Our copy

gov.uscourts.txnd.355696.302.0.pdf

Original

No public link identified.