University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Roman Catholic Diocese of Beaumont v. Sebelius FA-TX-0007
Docket / Court 1:13-cv-00709-RC ( E.D. Tex. )
State/Territory Texas
Case Type(s) Speech and Religious Freedom
Special Collection Contraception Insurance Mandate
Case Summary
On December 10, 2013, a non-profit religious organization filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas under the First Amendment, Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Administrative Procedure Act against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. ... read more >
On December 10, 2013, a non-profit religious organization filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas under the First Amendment, Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Administrative Procedure Act against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The plaintiffs asked the court to rule that the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) contraception insurance mandate, even with the accommodation for non-profit religious organizations, is unconstitutional. Specifically, the plaintiffs asked for both a preliminary and permanent injunction keeping the government from enforcing the contraception insurance mandate against them because it violates the organizations' deeply-help, Catholic religious beliefs.

On December 10, 2013, the plaintiff filed a motion for a temporary restraining order against the defendant and preliminary injunction. The defendants opposed this motion on the grounds that the accommodation to the ACA mandate does not substantially burden the plaintiffs' religious freedom under RFRA or cause the plaintiffs irreparable harm.

On December 23, 2013, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss, or, alternatively for summary judgment.

On January 2, 2014 U.S. District Court (Judge Ron Clark) granted the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction because he found that the accommodation, which requires the head of a religious organization to sign a form that authorizes a third-party to provide contraception insurance coverage to the organization's employees, imposes a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion.

As of April 7, 2014, the case is ongoing.

Mallory Jones - 04/07/2014


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Due Process
Equal Protection
Establishment Clause
Free Exercise Clause
Freedom of speech/association
Content of Injunction
Preliminary relief granted
Defendant-type
Hospital/Health Department
Discrimination-basis
Religion discrimination
General
Contraception
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Type of Facility
Non-government non-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 A non-profit, religious organization that believes the ACA's contraception mandate accommodation violates their religious freedom
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party None Yet / None
Public Int. Lawyer No
Nature of Relief Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Source of Relief Litigation
Case Ongoing Yes
Docket(s)
1:13−cv−00709 (E.D. Tex.)
FA-TX-0007-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 05/12/2014
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Original Complaint [ECF# 1]
FA-TX-0007-0001.pdf | Detail
Date: 12/10/2013
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction and Brief in Support of [ECF# 3]
FA-TX-0007-0002.pdf | Detail
Date: 12/10/2013
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendants' Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment, And in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [ECF# 10]
FA-TX-0007-0003.pdf | Detail
Date: 12/23/2013
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment [ECF# 11]
FA-TX-0007-0004.pdf | Detail
Date: 12/23/2013
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Statement of Material Facts [ECF# 22]
FA-TX-0007-0005.pdf | Detail
Date: 12/29/2013
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order [ECF# 32] (E.D. Tex.)
FA-TX-0007-0006.pdf | Detail
Date: 12/31/2013
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Memorandum and Order [ECF# 33] (10 F.Supp.3d 725) (E.D. Tex.)
FA-TX-0007-0007.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Date: 01/02/2014
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Final Judgment and Order of Injunction [ECF# 34] (E.D. Tex.)
FA-TX-0007-0008.pdf | Detail
Date: 01/03/2014
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Clark, Ron (E.D. Tex.)
FA-TX-0007-0006 | FA-TX-0007-0007 | FA-TX-0007-0008 | FA-TX-0007-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Cashiola, Randal G. (Texas)
FA-TX-0007-0001 | FA-TX-0007-0005 | FA-TX-0007-9000
Fernandez, Carolyn (Texas)
FA-TX-0007-0002
Defendant's Lawyers Bales, John Malcolm (District of Columbia)
FA-TX-0007-0003 | FA-TX-0007-0004
Delery, Stuart F. (District of Columbia)
FA-TX-0007-0003 | FA-TX-0007-0004
Hartnett, Kathleen R. (District of Columbia)
FA-TX-0007-0003 | FA-TX-0007-0004
Humphreys, Bradley Philip (District of Columbia)
FA-TX-0007-0003 | FA-TX-0007-0004 | FA-TX-0007-9000
Lieber, Sheila M. (District of Columbia)
FA-TX-0007-0003 | FA-TX-0007-0004
Ricketts, Jennifer (District of Columbia)
FA-TX-0007-0003 | FA-TX-0007-0004

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -