This was, incidentally, a ruling on a motion for a preliminary injunction, not a final order in the case.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.okwd.116005/gov.uscourts.okwd.116005.41.0.pdf
The article posted in the OP misleadingly suggests the quoted portion had anything to do with the decision.
In actual fact, the motion for a preliminary injunction was denied because the State of Oklahoma does not have standing to bring the suit on behalf of the National Guard members in that state.
There is a great fare thee well at the end, though:
Having denied the motion, the court cannot but note the potential consequences, for individual Guard members, of failure to comply with the vaccine mandate. Those consequences range (among other possibilities) from loss of periodic
pay to involuntary separation from the Guard. Loss of one or two paychecks is one
thing, serious though that may be in individual cases.
What the court cannot ignore
is the potentially devastating effect of involuntary separation (either as a result of
direct action or as a result of continuing loss of pay), especially where, as appears to
be the case here, the individual non-compliant Guard members did not have the benefit of well-informed leadership at the highest level of the Oklahoma Guard. The
court strongly urges the defendants to give every consideration to providing a brief
grace period–to facilitate prompt compliance with the vaccination mandate–before
directly or indirectly taking action which would end the military careers of any Oklahoma Guard members.
= new reply since forum marked as read