No. 19-1038

Department of Health and Human Services, et al. v. California, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-02-19
Status: GVR
Type: Paid
Response WaivedRelisted (2) Experienced Counsel
Tags: administrative-law affordable-care-act conscience-exemption contraceptive-coverage contraceptive-mandate health-insurance preventive-services religious-freedom-restoration-act
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw Arbitration SocialSecurity ERISA Securities JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2020-07-08 (distributed 2 times)
Related Cases: 19-1040 (Vide) 19-1053 (Vide)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

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 (from Petition)

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)

Docket Entries

2020-08-10
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2020-07-09
Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of <i>Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home</i> v. <i>Pennsylvania</i>, 591 U. S. ___ (2020).
2020-07-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 7/8/2020.
2020-04-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/24/2020.
2020-03-20
Waiver of right of respondent Little Sisters of the Poor Jeanne Jugan Residence to respond filed.
2020-03-19
Waiver of right of respondent March for Life Education and Defense Fund to respond filed.
2020-02-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 20, 2020)
2020-01-08
Application (19A757) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 20, 2020 to February 19, 2020, submitted to Justice Kagan.
2020-01-08
Application (19A757) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until February 19, 2020.

Attorneys

Department of Health and Human Services, et al.
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Petitioner
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Petitioner
Little Sisters of the Poor Jeanne Jugan Residence
Mark Leonard RienziThe Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Respondent
Mark Leonard RienziThe Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Respondent
March for Life Education and Defense Fund
John J. BurschAlliance Defending Freedom, Respondent
John J. BurschAlliance Defending Freedom, Respondent
State of California
Aimee Athena FeinbergCalifornia Department of Justice, Respondent
Aimee Athena FeinbergCalifornia Department of Justice, Respondent