University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Barron Industries, Inc. v. Sebelius FA-DC-0006
Docket / Court 1:13-cv-1330 ( D.D.C. )
State/Territory District of Columbia
Case Type(s) Speech and Religious Freedom
Special Collection Contraception Insurance Mandate
Case Summary
On September 4, 2013, a for-profit company filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of D.C. against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), the Administrative Procedure Act. and the First Amendment. The ... read more >
On September 4, 2013, a for-profit company filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of D.C. against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), the Administrative Procedure Act. and the First Amendment. The plaintiff, represented by the Thomas More Society, asked the court for an exception to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandate requiring employers to provide health insurance coverage of contraception. Specifically, the plaintiff claimed that providing insurance coverage of contraception would violate the deeply held, Catholic religious beliefs of the corporation's owners.

On September 25, 2013, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson granted the plaintiff's unopposed motion for preliminary injunction and stayed the case. The court initially ordered a stay until the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled in Gilardi v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services . The district court kept the stay in place until after the Supreme Court's ruling in Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius on June 30, 2014.

In Hobby Lobby, the Supreme Court held that the version of the contraceptive services mandate in place at that time was a violation of the plaintiff's rights under the RFRA. Based on that ruling and the parties' joint status report, on October 27, 2014 the district court entered a permanent injunction and judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, enjoining defendants from enforcing the version of the contraception mandate at issue in Hobby Lobby against the plaintiffs in this case. The parties were instructed to meet and confer on attorneys' fees and costs. The most recent status report in following that order was entered on December 17, 2014.

Mallory Jones - 10/09/2013
Mallory Jones - 01/31/2014
Kate Craddock - 07/24/2016


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Establishment Clause
Free Exercise Clause
Freedom of speech/association
Content of Injunction
Preliminary relief granted
Discrimination-basis
Religion discrimination
General
Abortion
Contraception
Religious programs / policies
Plaintiff Type
Closely-held (for profit) corporation
Private Plaintiff
Type of Facility
Non-government for profit
Causes of Action Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. ยงยง 551 et seq.
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Religious Freedom Rest. Act/Religious Land Use and Inst. Persons Act (RFRA/RLUIPA)
Defendant(s) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
U.S. Department of Labor
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Plaintiff Description Christian owners of a for-profit corporation, who feel that covering contraception conflicts with their religious beliefs.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Attorneys fees
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Litigation
Form of Settlement None on record
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year 2014
Case Ongoing No
Case Listing FA-DC-0004 : Gilardi v. Dep't of Health and Human Services [Gilardi v. Sebelius] (D.D.C.)
Docket(s)
1:13-cv-1330 (D.D.C.) 12/17/2014
FA-DC-0006-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint 09/04/2013
FA-DC-0006-0001.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Stay of Proceedings 09/23/2013
FA-DC-0006-0002.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Staying the Case 09/25/2013 (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0006-0003.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Injunction and Judgment 10/27/2014 (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0006-0004.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Jackson, Ketanji Brown (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0006-0003 | FA-DC-0006-0004 | FA-DC-0006-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Mersino, Erin Elizabeth (Michigan)
FA-DC-0006-0001 | FA-DC-0006-0002 | FA-DC-0006-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Pruski, Jacek (District of Columbia)
FA-DC-0006-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -