Staff Sgt. Jason A. Adkins, who's been with the Air Force for 14 years, sued Air Force officials and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld last year in a suit that has gotten
little press, but is critically important.
Adkins, a decorated 14-year veteran who flew on C-5s into Baghdad, sued Air Force officials and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld last year, charging he suffered retaliation after speaking out against the military's anthrax vaccination program.
The lawsuit and Farnan's opinion mention a series of articles by The News Journal in October 2004 about the anthrax program. Adkins alleges commanders "were angered and displeased by the media scrutiny and shortly thereafter, when he complained to a flight surgeon about headaches he thought were linked to the vaccine,he was reprimanded and grounded, ending his career, as an example to others.
Adkins is being represented by the
conservative civil-libertarian Rutherford Institute. While the case centers on freedom of speech issues, the opinion reads more like a Tom Clancy novel:
Between 1998 and 2004, Plaintiff received a series of anthrax vaccinations, six of which Plaintiff alleges were tainted with squalene, a substance used to increase the potency of the vaccination, as part of an experimental program. Plaintiff alleges that the military engaged in a program to cover-up airmen's concerns about the health and safety of the tainted vaccine, and airmen were actively discouraged to speak about this topic.
The military's experimental vaccine program has already been battered by the courts. In October of 2004, a permanent injunction was issued against Rumsfeld preventing use of the anthrax vaccine unless there was informed consent or a "Presidential waiver." (That case is Doe v. Rumsfeld, 2004 WL 2397332 (D.D.C. Oct.27, 2004)).
In this case, the government tried to dismiss Adkin's complaint, claiming that he didn't establish a case, and that anyway, the government can regulate the speech for "disciplinary purposes." Specifically, the government claimed the following:
Defendants also contend that Plaintiff's speech did not involve a matter of public concern, and Plaintiff has no interest in his speech which would outweigh the Air Force's countervailing interest in maintaining the obedience of its enlisted personnel.
So, the fact that soldiers left and right are falling sick because the vaccine they were FORCED to take is not a matter of public concern? And the Air Force has a "countervailing interest" in obedience? Doesn't pass the straight face test.
Thankfully, Judge Farnan applied the applicable law and concluded, inevitably, that Adkins DID indeed have a right to speak out on the issue and that he did state a viable claim.
The case is Adkins v. Rumsfeld, 2005 WL 2276676. For more info on the vaccine, check out The Military Vaccine Resource Directory. For background on the Adkins case, click here.