Judge Allows CIA to Fire Doctor Who Helped Enforce Military COVID Mandate

The CIA maintained that Adirim was not terminated over politics but because of ’multiple complaints’ from CIA staff about her conduct in the workplace.

Dr. Terry Adirim, acting assistant defense secretary for Health Affairs, gives an update on COVID-19 at the Pentagon on June 30, 2021. Screenshot via The Epoch Times/DOD

A federal judge has denied an emergency bid by Dr. Terry Adirim to halt her dismissal from the CIA, rejecting her claims that political activists orchestrated her firing in retaliation for her role in enforcing the military’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

In a ruling issued on May 9, U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff found that Adirim had failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of her claim that the CIA violated her constitutional rights. The decision clears the way for the agency to proceed with terminating Adirim’s employment under a contract provision allowing dismissal with 30 days’ notice.

Adirim, a former senior Defense Department official who served as the CIA’s Director of Global Health Services, alleged in court filings that she became the target of a politically motivated campaign led by activist Ivan Raiklin. She claimed in her lawsuit that Raiklin defamed her as a traitor and “architect” of the Pentagon’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate and that he enlisted fellow activist Laura Loomer to persuade President Donald Trump to intervene with the CIA to have her fired.

Her lawsuit named the CIA, Raiklin, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and the conservative nonprofit America’s Future, Inc., as defendants. It alleged due process violations, defamation, a contract breach, and a Privacy Act violation stemming from alleged leaks about her dismissal to Breitbart News.

In a 25-page opposition brief filed on May 6, Justice Department attorneys called Adirim’s theory “speculative and unsupported,” arguing that her theory relied on loosely drawn connections and unsubstantiated assumptions about political influence.

“Plaintiff pinpoints the blame not on the CIA, but on a non-governmental actor, Ivan Raiklin, whom she accuses of orchestrating her termination through a scheme of defamation and political influence,” the attorneys wrote. “Besides being farfetched—and untrue—Plaintiff’s allegations do not actually amount to any viable claim against the Federal Defendants, let alone any claim that merits an injunction.”

The Department of Justice acknowledged Adirim’s name appeared on Raiklin’s so-called “Deep State Target List” but said this had no bearing on the CIA’s decision. “There is no reason other than the close timing of Ms. Loomer’s White House visit and the CIA’s communication of its termination decision to Plaintiff to suggest the two are linked,” the filing states.

The CIA maintained that Adirim wasn’t terminated over politics but because of “multiple complaints” from CIA staff about her “inappropriate and harassing” conduct in the workplace.

According to a declaration from the agency’s deputy chief operating officer, senior leadership initiated a review of her behavior weeks before Loomer’s reported White House visit and made the decision to terminate her independently.

The political and legal controversy surrounding the military’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate intensified just days before the court’s ruling. On May 7, the Pentagon issued sweeping new guidance acknowledging that the mandate had been “an unfair, overbroad, and completely unnecessary burden” on service members. The memo directed military review boards to reinstate troops discharged over the mandate and remove related disciplinary records, declaring that the lack of due process in enforcing vaccine compliance was itself “an injustice.”

Adirim, who had signed key policy documents enabling the Pentagon’s mandate while serving as acting assistant secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, became a focal point in that broader political reckoning—even as the CIA maintained her dismissal was unrelated.

A soldier watches another soldier receive his COVID-19 vaccination from Army Preventative Medical Services in Fort Knox, Ky., on Sept. 9, 2021. Jon Cherry/Getty Images

In her complaint, Adirim contended that being fired just weeks before qualifying for federal retirement amounted to irreparable harm, that she had been defamed after decades of public service, and that her family had been endangered.

The CIA said that the decision was internal, lawful, and based on employee complaints rather than political pressure.

In response to the May 9 ruling, Adirim’s attorney Kevin Carroll told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement, “We respect the court’s decision and look forward to litigating the underlying issues.”

The case remains active in federal court but without the injunction she had sought, Adirim’s termination is now set to proceed as planned.

Raiklin, in a post on social media platform X, hailed the decision: “Terry Adirim, you’re fired!!! Your lawyer is next.”