A federal court settlement reached April 15, 2026 delivers real, enforceable relief to Coast Guard members who refused the COVID-19 vaccine on religious grounds. If you were affected, your window to act is now.

A Federal Court Just Validated What Coast Guard Members Already Knew

On April 15, 2026, a joint stipulation of dismissal was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Case No. 4:22-cv-00825-P), officially settling the Jackson, Stone & Marcenelle v. Mullin et al. — a lawsuit brought on behalf of Coast Guard service members who sought religious accommodations from the military’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

The settlement is not just a legal formality. It is a documented acknowledgment by the federal government that the COVID-19 vaccine mandate was, in the government’s own words, “unlawful as implemented and an unfair, overbroad, and completely unnecessary burden on service members.”

For our clients in Harkins et al. v. United States and for thousands of other Coast Guard members who stood on principle and paid a price for it, this settlement sends a clear and powerful signal: the government got it wrong, and now it’s time to make it right.

What the Settlement Actually Requires

This agreement goes well beyond words. The federal defendants — including the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Commandant of the Coast Guard — are legally bound to take the following actions:

Personnel Record Cleanup All CG-3307 administrative remarks documenting a member’s decision to remain unvaccinated will be removed from Coast Guard Military Human Resources Records. Dr. Navarro’s memorandum — which many members had used as the basis for adverse actions — must also be removed upon request. Any Coast Guard member who previously sought a religious exemption can submit a request at any time after the agreement’s effective date, and the Coast Guard must complete the removal within 60 days.

An Official ALCOAST Repudiation Within one month of the effective date, and again one year later, the Commandant of the Coast Guard must issue a public ALCOAST general message explicitly stating that the mandate was unlawful, that COVID-19 vaccination status cannot be considered in promotions, assignments, or evaluations, and that religious discrimination is illegal and contrary to the Coast Guard’s core values.

Protected Promotion and Selection Boards For at least five years, selection board instructions must include language prohibiting boards from considering adverse information related to COVID-19 vaccination status. Members may also submit letters to the board explaining gaps or deficiencies in their record caused by the mandate — and boards may only consider those letters to the member’s benefit, never their detriment.

A DHS Memorandum Directing Records Corrections The Department of Homeland Security will issue a memorandum directing the Board for Correction of Military Records (BCMR) of the Coast Guard to exercise broad discretion in correcting the records of service members and former members who suffered harm under the vaccine requirement.

Why This Matters for Our Clients in Harkins et al. v. United States

At Military Backpay, we represent Coast Guard members and veterans in Harkins et al. v. United States, a separate but directly related action seeking back pay and financial relief for those who were separated, demoted, passed over for promotion, or otherwise financially harmed as a result of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

The Jackson/Stone settlement strengthens our clients’ position in several important ways:

  • The government has now formally admitted on the record that the mandate was unlawful. That admission matters in any proceeding that turns on the lawfulness of adverse actions taken under that mandate.
  • The BCMR has been directed to exercise broad discretion in correcting records, which supports the relief our clients are seeking through established legal channels.
  • The removal of adverse records clears the path for our clients to present the strongest possible case for back pay and reinstatement without the weight of tainted personnel files.

This is momentum — and momentum matters.

Were You a Coast Guard Member Affected by the Vaccine Mandate?

If you served in the United States Coast Guard and experienced any of the following, you may have a claim worth pursuing:

  • You requested a religious accommodation and were denied
  • You were separated or forced out because of your vaccination status
  • You were passed over for promotion, advancement, or a desirable assignment
  • You received adverse administrative remarks related to the vaccine mandate
  • You took a break in service as a result of the mandate

The government has already acknowledged wrongdoing. The legal framework is in place. What’s missing is you taking the first step.

Sign Up Today

Our team at Military Backpay is actively working on Coast Guard vaccine mandate claims. The process starts with a simple opt-in — no commitment, no upfront cost, just a conversation about what you experienced and what you may be owed.

Click here to sign up and get started →

The window to pursue relief does not stay open forever. With the Jackson/Stone settlement now final and the BCMR directed to act, the time to move is now — not later.

Military Backpay LLC represents current and former service members in claims for back pay, records corrections, and related relief. This post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Visit militarybackpay.com to learn more.