Executive Order 14043: Requiring Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination for Federal Employees

What the employee order required

EO 14043 was signed on September 9, 2021. It directed executive agency heads to implement a COVID-19 vaccination requirement for federal employees, with exceptions only as required by law. The Safer Federal Workforce Task Force supplied implementation guidance, including timing and agency processes. The order addressed the federal government in its role as employer. It was not a statute requiring vaccination for every U.S. worker, nor did its text cover federal contractors through the same mechanism.

Agencies had to deal with records, reasonable-accommodation requests and personnel procedures under other applicable laws. The phrase “exceptions only as required by law” matters: it did not erase disability or religious-accommodation duties, and it did not guarantee that every requested exemption would be granted. A particular past employment action requires its own agency record and legal analysis. The Federal Register text supplies the operative presidential instruction.

Implementation and legal challenge

Agencies began implementing the requirement in 2021. The administration later described a high compliance rate in EO 14099, counting workers who had received a dose or had a pending or approved exception or extension. That is the administration's reported measure, not a claim that every federal employee had completed vaccination or that all accommodation decisions were correct. The implementation record should be separated from what the signed order legally directed.

Federal workers and organizations challenged the mandate. A Texas federal district court entered a preliminary injunction on January 21, 2022. The Fifth Circuit's en banc Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden opinion, dated March 23, 2023, dealt with jurisdiction over the challenge and affirmed the preliminary order. Its procedural posture is important: it was litigation over a specific injunction and set of claims. It was not the Supreme Court's January 2022 decision about OSHA's different emergency standard.

Revocation in May 2023

EO 14099 signed on May 9, 2023 revoked both EO 14043 and EO 14042 effective May 12. It said implementing agency policies premised on those orders could no longer be enforced and should be rescinded consistent with law. That makes the current answer for EO 14043 itself “No.” Revocation was a presidential action with its own effective date, different from the dates when courts entered or reviewed preliminary injunctions.

The order's end does not by itself adjudicate past discipline, accommodation decisions or claims for relief. It also does not remove unrelated federal workplace health statutes or requirements that may have independent authority. Readers should identify the relevant employer policy, date and order before drawing a conclusion about a particular employee.

How it differed from the other vaccine measures

EO 14042 worked through federal contracting clauses and task-force guidance. OSHA's vaccination-or-testing emergency standard relied on workplace-safety authority over large employers. The Supreme Court stayed that OSHA standard in January 2022. The Court separately allowed a CMS rule for participating healthcare facilities to take effect. Neither ruling automatically disposed of EO 14043, whose employee and civil-service questions were litigated in a different case.

How to read this history

The timeline below separates the 2021 order, interim litigation and 2023 revocation. The sources include the signed order, the Fifth Circuit opinion and EO 14099. A historical court ruling may explain why implementation changed before formal revocation; a later revocation answers whether the original presidential directive remains. This guide was checked on September 26, 2026, not offered as individual legal advice.