112 F. Supp. 3d 402
E.D. Va.2015Background
- Dr. Jason Heap, a Humanist, applied to be a Navy chaplain and was denied.
- Heap is endorsed by The Humanist Society (THS), a 501(c)(3) church for tax purposes.
- Navy chaplain recruitment uses CARE Board review and a multi-step qualification/endorsement process involving DoD instructions and DoDI 1304.28.
- Endorsement must come from a religious organization; THS endorsement was first identified during Heap’s process in 2013.
- Political pressure and Congressional letters circulated urging denial of Heap’s and THS’s applications.
- Heap and THS sued DoD and Navy officials, asserting RFRA, Establishment/Free Exercise/No Religious Test/First Amendment claims, and a Bivens claim against individual defendants; THS sought standing to challenge the endorsement process.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| THS standing to sue | Heap/THS claimed organizational/associational standing. | THS lacks standing (no injury in fact, not a traditional membership org, no ripeness). | THS lacks standing on its own and associational standing; third-party standing rejected. |
| Ripeness of THS claims | THS injuries are concrete and imminent via denial and administrative process. | AFCB never conducted merits review; claims not ripe. | Claims not ripe; dismissal allowed. |
| RFRA and Free Exercise viability | Navy policy burdens Heap’s religious exercise and targets Humanism. | No substantial burden on Heap’s exercise; policy not tailored to Humanism as a religion. | RFRA claim dismissed; Free Exercise claim dismissed. |
| First Amendment and associational rights of Heap | Chaplaincy is a forum for religious speech; denial infringes speech/association. | Chaplaincy is a government employment context, Garcetti applies; no speech/association rights in hiring. | Garcetti applies; Heap has no First Amendment protections as an applicant; no retaliation/prior restraint established. |
| Bivens remedy and qualified immunity for Individual Defendants | Damages for constitutional harms against individual officers. | Bivens not available in military context; if available, qualified immunity defenses apply. | Bivens remedy not created; qualified immunity applies; damages not available against individuals. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (pleading must show plausible claim; not automatic acceptance of allegations)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for Rule 12(b)(6) claims)
- Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006) (public employee speech rule; employer control of speech)
- Chappell v. Wallace, 462 U.S. 296 (1983) (military personnel can seek constitutional redress for rights violations)
- Lebron v. Rumsfeld, 670 F.3d 540 (2012) (special factors counseling hesitation in military Bivens actions)
- Cioca v. Rumsfeld, 720 F.3d 505 (2013) (military context limits Bivens; separation of powers concerns)
- Middlebrooks v. Leavitt, 525 F.3d 341 (2008) (application to military employment; Bivens limitations)
- Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961) (No religious test; First Amendment religion definition debates (footnote on Secular Humanism))
- Dettmer v. London, 799 F.2d 929 (1986) (Fourth Circuit's approach to Humanism as religion for First Amendment purposes)