Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches, et al. v. Department of the Navy, et al.

Background and Context Petitioners, 54 Navy Non-liturgical (aka, “evangelical”) chaplains, see Glossary, challenge specific Navy Chaplain Corps’ selection board1 procedures under the Establishment and Due Process Clauses. “A Navy chaplain's role within the service is ‘unique,’ involving simultaneous service as clergy or a ‘professional representative[]’ of a particular religious denomination and as a commissioned naval officer.” In re England, 375 F.3d 1169, 1170 (D.C. Cir. 2004), cert denied, 543 U.S. 1152 (2005) (emphasis added-citation omitted). This Circuit law implicates, if not holds, commissioning a denominational-representative to provide religious ministry fuses civic and religious power. Yet, the D.C. courts for over 20 years have rejected Petitioners’ constant argument commissioning denominational-representatives as naval officers does not change their “denominational agent” status, fuses civic and religious power, and Bd. of Ed. of Kiryas Joel v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687, 703-708 (1994) governs this case. Until fiscal year (“FY”) 2003, after this litigation challenged Navy selection board procedures, Navy selection boards were staffed by five or six chaplains, one of whom was always a Catholic. The Department of Defense (“DoD”) defines chaplains as denominational-representatives, i.e., agents of a religious organization, whose primary duty is to provide religious ministry. Inspector General investigations of 1 “Selection” boards refers to statutory boards that select chaplains for promotions and selective early retirement (“SER”).