Kellogg v. United States of America

Michael Kellogg, a federal contractor, refused a COVID-19 vaccine on sincere religious grounds and was terminated. He sued the United States, arguing that the federal contractor vaccine mandate violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment. The District Court dismissed the case, but the Court of Appeals reversed, ruling the mandate likely burdened religious exercise without sufficient justification. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether the government's interest in public health overrides individual religious objections in a pandemic context. Oral arguments were held in early 2025.

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of Kellogg on April 22, 2025, holding that the government failed to demonstrate it could not accommodate religious objectors while achieving its public health goals, thus violating RFRA. The mandate was enjoined as applied to religious objectors.

Whether the federal government's enforcement of a vaccine mandate on federal contractors, without providing a religious exemption, violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act or the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

The decision reinforced the requirement for religious accommodations in federal mandates, sparking intense debate on the balance between collective health security and individual religious liberty. It prompted revisions to federal contractor policies and influenced subsequent litigation on vaccine mandates, religious exemptions, and the scope of executive emergency powers in the post-pandemic era.