Department of Health and Human Services, et al. v. California, et al.
AdministrativeLaw Arbitration SocialSecurity ERISA Securities JusticiabilityDoctri
Whether the agencies had statutory authority under the ACA and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 to expand the conscience exemption to the contraceptive-coverage mandate
QUESTION PRESENTED The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), 42 U.S.C. 18001 et seqg., requires many group health plans and health-insurance issuers that offer group or individual health coverage to provide coverage for preventive services, including women’s preventive care, without cost-sharing. See 42 U.S.C. 300gg-13(a). Guidelines and regulations implementing that requirement promulgated in 2011 by the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and the Treasury mandated that such entities cover contraceptives approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The mandate exempted churches, and subsequent rulemaking established an accommodation for certain other entities with religious objections to providing contraceptive coverage. In October 2017, the agencies promulgated interim final rules expanding the exemption to a broad range of entities with sincere religious or moral objections to providing contraceptive coverage. In November 2018, after considering comments solicited on the interim rules, the agencies promulgated final rules expanding the exemption. The question presented is as follows: Whether the agencies had statutory authority under the ACA and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq., to expand the conscience exemption to the mandate. (I)