SCOTUS to hear challenge to ACA birth control mandate

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
See also: Major cases of the Supreme Court October 2015 term


Supreme Court of the United States
Zubik v. Burwell
Docket number: 14-1418
Court: United States Supreme Court
Court membership
Chief Justice
John G. Roberts
Associate Justices
Anthony Kennedy • Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg • Steven G. Breyer
Samuel Alito • Sonia Sotomayor • Elena Kagan

March 22, 2015

By Kelly Coyle

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Zubik v. Burwell, a follow-up to the 2014 case Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, in which the court ruled that religious for-profit corporations could not be forced to provide free birth control coverage to their employees under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. Wednesday's case will address whether the exemption process created for religious nonprofits—including charities, schools, colleges, and hospitals—to opt out of the birth control requirement violates their rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.

Churches, temples, mosques, and other places of worship are automatically exempt from the birth control mandate, but religious nonprofit organizations must "notify the government that they are opting out of providing birth control insurance coverage on religious grounds" to receive an exemption. The government then makes "arrangements with insurance companies to then offer the coverage independently, at no cost, to employees and students who do not subscribe to the same beliefs on birth control," according to NPR.[1]

The religious organizations argue that submitting the opt-out document violates their right to religious freedom and requires them to maintain an "objectionable contractual relationship." Their writ of certiorari argues that "It is undisputed that Petitioners sincerely believe that taking these actions would make them complicit in sin. And it is equally undisputed that if Petitioners refuse to take these actions, they will incur ruinous penalties."[2]

Writing on behalf of the government, United States Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, Jr. argues in his brief in response that the choice to opt out of providing birth control to employees respects the religious freedom of employers and a woman's access to healthcare. Verrilli argues, "In our pluralistic society, that sort of substitution of obligations is an appropriate means of accommodating religious objectors while also protecting important interests of third parties, such as women’s interest in full and equal health coverage."[3]

Healthcare Policy Logo.png
Healthcare policy in the U.S.
Obamacare overview
Obamacare lawsuits
Medicare and Medicaid
Healthcare statistics
Public Policy Logo-one line.png
Obamacare glossary • Effect of Obamacare • Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
The court limited the argument to the following question:
  • "Whether the HHS Mandate and its 'accommodation' violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) by forcing religious nonprofits to act in violation of their sincerely held religious beliefs, when the Government has not proven that this compulsion is the least restrictive means of advancing any compelling interest."[4]

SCOTUSblog's Lyle Denniston explained that the court will have to decide whether the birth control mandate "imposes a 'substantial burden' on the religious freedom of non-profits...whether the mandate in fact serves a 'compelling interest' of the government, and whether an attempt to provide an exemption from the mandate satisfies the requirement that such an accommodation is 'the least restrictive means' of achieving the government’s policy interest."[5]

The death of Justice Antonin Scalia creates the possibility that the court could deliver a 4-4 ruling in the case. If this happens, the lower court's ruling in the case will be upheld. Seven separate cases were consolidated under Zubik, which means that a 4-4 decision by the court will have different outcomes depending on the specific case. Most, but not all, of the lower courts ruled that the exemption process created by the government for religious nonprofits is acceptable. The court could also decide to re-hear the case next term.

Gregory S. Baylor, senior counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom, said his clients "and many other nonprofits that have sued the administration are shielded from the force of the mandate until the Supreme Court decides the issue — even if they lose at the circuit level. If the court lists the case for re-argument instead of affirming the circuits, he said, that protection should stay until after the full court can hear the case," according to The Washington Times.[6]

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ NPR, "Supreme Court To Take Up Another Challenge To Obamacare," accessed November 14, 2015
  2. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Writ of Certiorari: Zubik v. Burwell," accessed November 15, 2015
  3. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Brief for the respondents in opposition," accessed November 15, 2015
  4. ↑ SupremeCourt.gov, "Zubik v. Burwell," accessed November 9, 2015
  5. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Court to hear birth-control challenges (UPDATED)," accessed November 14, 2015
  6. ↑ The Washington Times, "Scalia’s death shakes contraception mandate, other high-profile court cases," accessed February 18, 2016


Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=SCOTUS_to_hear_challenge_to_ACA_birth_control_mandate&oldid=7709640"