Arnold v. Sec'y of Navy, 20-5330

• Decision Date: 12 November 2021
• Docket Number: 20-5330
• Parties: Richard Arnold, et al., Appellants v. Secretary of the Navy, et al., Appellees Rick P. Bradley, et al., Appellees
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit

Richard Arnold, et al., Appellants

Rick P. Bradley, et al., Appellees
v.
Secretary of the Navy, et al., Appellees

No. 20-5330

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

November 12, 2021

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 1:19-cv-02755)

Before: Tatel, Rao and Walker, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM

We heard this appeal on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. After giving full consideration to the parties' briefs, we have determined that the issues therein do not warrant a published opinion. See D.C. Cir. R. 36(d). Given the district court's careful and sound analysis, it is hereby

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the decision of the district court be affirmed.

This case is the offshoot of a long-running dispute between former non-liturgical Protestant Navy chaplains and the Navy. The underlying dispute has fueled more than twenty years of litigation, demanded the resources of multiple district judges, and occupied several court of appeals panels. In re Navy Chaplaincy, 323 F.Supp.3d 25, 31 (D.D.C. 2018). In 2018, the district court granted summary judgment to the Navy as to the chaplains' systemic challenges to broadly applicable personnel procedures. See generally id. That decision left only the chaplains' individualized claims to be resolved.

In this most recent round of litigation, the chaplains purport to bring those individualized claims, alleging that the Navy: (1) retaliated against them; (2) constructively discharged them;

1

(3) discriminated against their religious free speech; and (4) violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Complaint at 67-72, Arnold v. Secretary of Navy, No. 19-2755, 2020 WL 1930393 (D.D.C. Apr. 21, 2020) ("Complaint"). The chaplains further argue that 10 U.S.C. § 613a, a statute barring disclosure of Naval personnel selection board proceedings, runs afoul of the Constitution by denying them evidence necessary to bring their claims. Id. at 70.

The district court dismissed all but the religious speech claims on res judicata grounds, to the extent that the claims raised systemic challenges already litigated. But the court severed the individual claims related to retaliation, constructive discharge, and religious speech and granted the chaplains the opportunity to refile those claims individually. In addition, finding the chaplains' filings "duplicative and harassing," the district court issued a pre-filing injunction requiring the chaplains to seek leave of the court prior to refiling individual claims. Arnold, 2020 WL 1930393, at *9-10. The court also denied the chaplains' motion for reconsideration regarding section 613a. On appeal, the...