On December 10, 2013, a non-profit religious organization filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The plaintiffs alleged that the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) contraception insurance mandate violated the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The plaintiffs contended that the accommodation for non-profit religious organizations was insufficient to remedy these harms. The plaintiffs sought both a preliminary and permanent injunction that would keep the government from enforcing the contraception insurance mandate against them.
On December 10, 2013, the plaintiff filed a motion for a temporary restraining order against the defendant and for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiff stated that it would be harmed as soon as the new insurance requirements became effective on January 1, 2014. Because of this impending harm, the plaintiff claimed it required an injunction, which would prevent the government from enforcing the mandate against it. The defendants opposed this motion on the grounds that the accommodation to the ACA mandate did not substantially burden the plaintiffs' religious freedom under RFRA or cause the plaintiff's irreparable harm.
On December 23, 2013, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss or summary judgment in the alternative. The defendant argued that the ACA did not substantially burden the plaintiff's exercise of religion and that, even if it did, the ACA met strict scrutiny.
On January 2, 2014, the District Court ordered that the plaintiff was entitled to a permanent injunction because the accommodation imposed a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion. Specifically, the mandate impermissibly required the head of a religious organization to sign a form that authorized a third party to provide contraception insurance coverage to the organization's employees. 10 F. Supp. 3d 725. The next day, the court ordered a final judgment and order of injunction that stated its terms and the acts restrained.
The defendants appealed on February 24, 2014. On appeal, this case was consolidated with other cases, including
East Texas Baptist University v. Sebelius. The Fifth Circuit overturned the district court, stating that "the acts that violated their faith are those of third parties" and that, under RFRA, the plaintiffs did not have standing to challenge the acts of those third parties. Thus, the Fifth Circuit held that the plaintiffs could not demonstrate that the ACA, with its exemption, substantially burdened the plaintiffs' religious exercise.
The plaintiffs appealed and on May 17, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a petition for writ of certiorari. The Supreme Court vacated the judgement and remanded the case, citing
Zubik, which held that it was appropriate to vacate and remand so that the courts of appeals could address the arguments in response to the order for supplemental briefs. The supplemental briefing request asked parties to address how contraceptive coverage could be obtained by employees through insurance companies that did not require any involvement by plaintiffs beyond their decision to provide health insurance without contraceptive coverage. 136. S. Ct. 1557.
The court of appeals then granted defendants' motion to stay the proceedings to allow the parties to negotiate a solution in accordance with the Supreme Court's order.
On October 16, 2017, the parties filed a joint stipulation to dismiss, citing new regulations that afforded the plaintiffs an exemption. The new regulations stated that forcing the plaintiffs to choose between the contraception mandate or penalties imposed a substantial burden on religious exercise under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. On October 19, 2017, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Court granted the joint stipulation and dismissed the case.
The case is closed.
Mallory Jones - 04/07/2014
Cianan Lesley - 03/10/2019
Cedar Hobbs - 11/03/2019
compress summary
