Case: Slavin v. Parnell
1:26-cv-03009 | U.S. District Court for the District of District of Columbia
Filed Date: Aug. 27, 2026
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
Case Summary
This case challenges the Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) proposed termination of three Stars and Stripes journalists, allegedly in retaliation for reporting on deteriorating conditions aboard the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln and for making statements in support of the press’s freedom to cover military operations.
On August 27, 2026, three employees of Stars and Stripes, a DOD-authorized news outlet that serves as an independent news source for the U.S. military community, filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs sued the DOD, the Secretary of Defense, and several other DOD officials. The plaintiffs are represented by the Government Accountability Project, Lawyers for Good Government, Media Freedom & Information Access Clinic at Yale Law School, and Democracy Defenders Fund. The court originally assigned this case to District Judge Christopher R. Cooper, who oversaw Dardarian v. Department of Defense, a lawsuit by Stars and Stripes subscribers against the DOD. However, on August 28, 2026, Judge Cooper concluded that the two cases were not related, and issued an order to reassign this case. This case was reassigned to District Judge Trevor N. McFadden.
According to the plaintiffs, in the months preceding this lawsuit, the DOD implemented policies aimed at curbing journalistic independence at Stars and Stripes. In August 2026, DOD officials expressed discontent with comments that the outlet’s publisher and one of its reporters made regarding the policies, which appeared in a July 2026 CBS Sunday Morning segment. On August 11, 2026, Stars and Stripes published a story about problems aboard the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln, and the next day, a DOD official directed the Stars and Stripes publisher to present notices of separation to the outlet’s Editor-in-Chief and one of its reporters based on statements the latter employees made to CBS. The publisher chose to retire rather than to deliver the notices, and sent his notice of resignation to DOD officials on August 18, 2026. On August 21, 2026, the defendants sent notices of proposed separation to all three employees, charging each with insubordination and violation of administrative regulations. The notices indicated that the DOD proposed to separate the employees no earlier than five business days from their receipt of the notices.
The plaintiffs raised several claims under the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). They alleged that the DOD violated the First Amendment by issuing notices of termination in retaliation for the plaintiffs' statements to CBS, and by implementing policies that imposed content- and viewpoint-based restrictions on what Stars and Stripes reported. The plaintiffs also raised APA challenges to both the terminations and the policies underlying them: they argued that the agency's actions were arbitrary and capricious, that DOD did not follow proper procedure, and that the DOD’s actions were inconsistent with First Amendment protections for speech and press. The plaintiffs sought declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and reinstatement with back pay if they were terminated before the case was resolved.
On August 27, 2026, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order that would prohibit the DOD from proceeding with its threatened termination of the plaintiffs' employment. On August 28, 2026, the plaintiffs added a motion for preliminary injunction. Several non-parties filed amicus briefs on behalf of the plaintiffs.
On August 28, 2026, the court held a hearing on the plaintiffs’ motions for injunctive relief. On September 4, 2026, the court denied both of the plaintiffs’ motions, reasoning that the plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed on their First Amendment claim because they had spoken in their official capacities, rather than as private citizens.
As of September 2026, this case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Emma Farrell (9/13/2026)
People
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/74711301/parties/slavin-v-parnell/
Becker, Harold Craig (District of Columbia)
Martin, Zsa'Queria (District of Columbia)
Mays, Tianna Jade (District of Columbia)
Covington, Brett S. (District of Columbia)
Brown, Bruce D. (District of Columbia)
Documents in the Clearinghouse
Docket
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/74711301/slavin-v-parnell/
Last updated Oct. 18, 2026, 3:11 a.m.
Docket for: SLAVIN v. PARNELL
Case Details
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government
Key Dates
Filing Date: Aug. 27, 2026
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Journalists employed by a DOD-authorized news outlet
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Federal
Department of Defense
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
Constitutional Clause(s):
Other Dockets:
District of District of Columbia 1:26-cv-03009
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Relief Sought:
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Issues
General/Misc.:
Case Summary of Slavin v. Parnell, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/48412/ (last updated 9/13/2026).