The Director of the Air Force Review Boards Agency has determined that USAF Colonel Katheryn Ellis was the victim of illegal discrimination because she was a Christian when she was relieved of command on October 21, 2021. The director of the AFRBA ordered that COL Ellis's record be corrected and that she be considered for selection to brigadier general by a special board because she was deprived of that opportunity by her improper removal from command. This marks the first time violation of a religious objection to the COVID vaccine has been substantiated and the victim of religious discrimination had their record expunged of all derogatory information.

The AFRBA was established to streamline the adjudication of military and civilian personnel matters through a number of statutory and secretarial boards. The Agency reports directly to the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower and Reserve Affairs (SAF/MR). A service review board is empowered to change military records, removing information, correcting records, and ordering retroactive promotions if that is what is needed.

The story starts on the downward slope of COVID scare where the recognition that a large number of people had very strong moral objections to the vaccine was beginning to dawn on the government. Ellis had applied for and received a religious exemption from taking the COVID vaccine. For her boss, that was like waving a red flag at a bull.

An Air Force colonel who was relieved of command last month at Columbus Air Force Base, Mississippi, claims she was fired after she refused to order her subordinates to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.

Col. Katheryn Ellis, the former commander of the 14th Medical Group, told Task & Purpose that on Oct. 12 she was told by the commander of the 14th Flying Training Wing, Col. Seth Graham, to issue an order for two of her civilian employees to get vaccinated against the novel coronavirus.

...

However, Ellis believed Graham’s order conflicted with her own religious beliefs, as well as a request for a religious exemption from the COVID-19 vaccine mandate which she filed on Sept. 17. Ellis did not feel comfortable sharing the specifics of her beliefs “other than they are sincerely held,” she said, but this was the first time a vaccine violated her religious beliefs. 

“To clarify, my religious beliefs prevent me from taking the vaccine, actively promoting the vaccine, and from administering the vaccine to others myself (I’m a nurse),” Ellis said in a text message. “These objections were included in my religious accommodation request.”

...

Because she felt the order conflicted with her religious beliefs, Ellis consulted with the base legal office the morning of Oct. 13 to figure out what to do next. On the advice of the legal office, Ellis said she worked with the vice wing commander, Col. Jeremy Bergin, to have Bergin issue the vaccination order on her behalf. He agreed to do so, and on Oct. 15 he issued the order, Ellis said. Apparently, the two civilians in question had already been vaccinated, but Bergin said the wing commander, Col. Graham, needed the order to be issued anyway, Ellis recalled.

“At the end of the day, I ensured the orders were issued in a timely manner that didn’t compromise my integrity or my religious beliefs and rights,” Ellis, who first joined the Air Force in 1997 and has deployed to Afghanistan, told Task & Purpose.

...

Ellis said the specific reason was because she did not issue the vaccination order herself. She recalled Graham saying as much during her relief of command meeting.

“He said, ‘I think you know what this is about. When you can’t issue orders you have been given. I can’t have commanders who choose what orders they execute and what orders they don’t,’” Ellis recalled. “I tried to explain that ‘it’s part of the religious accommodation process.’ He said, ‘ok, well, that’s not going to work in this wing. So we need to move on.’”

Ellis made a complaint, which was initially denied, but with the help of a great military law attorney, she took her case into administrative channels and prevailed. The review board found that Ellis had taken all the appropriate steps and that she had been singled out for discrimination. The text is from the AFRBA decision provided to RedState.

For Allegation 1(3), we have determined that a preponderance of the evidence establishes that Appellant was discriminated against based on her sincerely held belief when she was denied a religious accommodation from performing COVID-19 related duties. We find that Col [redcated in the report] took adverse action motivated by a desire to avoid accommodating a religious belief, observance, or practice that he knew or suspected the Appellant needed and would not pose an undue hardship. Employer-employee cooperation and flexibility are key to the search for a reasonable accommodation, and evidence showed that Col [redacted in the report] was resistant to that.

In the end, it was a complete victory for Colonel Ellis.

Accordingly, it is directed that the following actions be taken to make the Appellant whole: 1) the previous unsubstantiated finding of discrimination in the Complaint Clarification Report be reversed in Allegation 1 to read SUBSTANTIATED, 2) the appellant's official records be expunged of all references to her removal/relief from command etc., or change removal of command from "for cause" to "without cause", 3) any adverse actions taken against the appellant as a result of denial of RA be reversed and expunged from her official records, 4) the Officer Performance Report expedite correction or removal consideration if appellant's promotion recommendation form and any other records within the Board's purview were impacted, 5) the appellant's corrected promotion record receive consideration by a Special Selection Board for promotion to Brigadier General (0-7), if applicable, 6) after providing proof of receipts/validation, appellant be reimbursed of attorney fees she actually paid to "R DA VIS YOUNTS, ESQ", and associated fees in relations to this case from the date of representation.

What Ellis's boss did was exactly what he faulted her for when he said, "can’t have commanders who choose what orders they execute and what orders they don’t." He had received an order to make religious accommodation to the COVID policy. He decided his hostility to the idea that an officer would actually honor their faith was more important than his duty to follow directions. 

Hopefully, this decision will serve as something of a precedent in the military allowing thousands of members of the Armed Forces who were arbitrarily dismissed for holding fast to their beliefs.