Court Opinion

ID: 9880847
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-28 21:00:30.456474+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:57:58.702895
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2085      Doc: 27        Filed: 09/27/2023     Pg: 1 of 4

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-2085

        ELIZABETH ETHERTON,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., in his official capacity as President of the United States;
        OFFICE OF HEAD START; BERNADINE FUTRELL, PH.D. in her official
        capacity as Director of the Office of Head Start; ADMINISTRATION FOR
        CHILDREN AND FAMILIES; JOOYEUN CHANG, in her official capacity as
        Acting Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children & Families;
        DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; XAVIER BECCERA,
        in his official capacity as Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:22-cv-00195-LMB-JFA)

        Submitted: September 18, 2023                              Decided: September 27, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Daniel R. Suhr, Jeffrey D. Jennings, LIBERTY JUSTICE CENTER,
        Chicago, Illinois, for Appellant. Jessica D. Aber, United States Attorney, Richmond,
        Virginia, Lauren A. Wetzler, Chief, Civil Division, Yuri S. Fuchs, Assistant United States
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2085      Doc: 27         Filed: 09/27/2023    Pg: 2 of 4

        Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for
        Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                                    2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2085       Doc: 27          Filed: 09/27/2023      Pg: 3 of 4

        PER CURIAM:

               Elizabeth Etherton appeals the district court’s dismissal of her amended complaint

        without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm.

               On November 30, 2021, the United States Department of Health and Human

        Services (“HHS”) issued an interim final rule establishing a COVID-19 mask and vaccine

        mandate covering federal Head Start programs. * See Vaccine and Mask Requirements to

        Mitigate the Spread of COVID-19 in Head Start Programs, 86 Fed. Reg. 68052-01, 68053,

        68060-61 (Nov. 30, 2021). Etherton is a prekindergarten (“preK”) teacher who declined

        to get vaccinated, citing medical reasons. She filed a complaint challenging the interim

        final rule, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. The district court ruled that Etherton

        failed to show an injury in fact and therefore lacked standing to challenge the rule.

                “To establish standing, a plaintiff must show (i) that [s]he suffered an injury in fact

        that is concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent; (ii) that the injury was likely caused

        by the defendant; and (iii) that the injury would likely be redressed by judicial relief.”

        TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 141 S. Ct. 2190, 2203 (2021). There were no Head Start

        students in Etherton’s classroom and she experienced no disciplinary action or changes in

        her employment as the result of her vaccination status. Shortly after she initiated her

        lawsuit, her school district announced that it would not strictly enforce the vaccine

        requirement for staff who did not serve Head Start students, nor would it pursue

               *
                HHS has since removed the requirement at issue here. See Removal of the
        Vaccine Requirements for Head Start Programs, 88 Fed. Reg. 41326-02, 41326 (June 26,
        2023).

                                                       3
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2085      Doc: 27        Filed: 09/27/2023     Pg: 4 of 4

        disciplinary action against staff assigned to classrooms that did not have Head Start

        students. Because we conclude that Etherton failed to show that she suffered an actual or

        imminent injury, we agree with the district court’s determination that she lacked standing

        to challenge the interim rule.

               Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order dismissing the complaint without

        prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We deny as moot Appellees’ motion to

        dismiss the appeal as moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

        contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would

        not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                     AFFIRMED

                                                    4