In a decision that drew an unusually fierce dissent from the three female justices, the US Supreme Court sided on Thursday with religiously affiliated nonprofit groups in a clash between religious freedom and women’s rights.
The decision temporarily exempts a Christian college from part of the regulations that provide contraception coverage under the Affordable Care Act.
The court’s order was brief, provisional and unsigned, but it drew a furious reaction from the three female members — Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan. The order, Sotomayor wrote, was at odds with the court’s 5-4 decision on Monday in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, which involved for-profit corporations.
“Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe they can take us at our word,” Sotomayor wrote. “Not so today.”
The court’s action “undermines confidence in this institution,” she added.
Monday’s decision and the order on Thursday were dual blows to US President Barack Obama’s administration’s efforts to provide contraception coverage, said Walter Dellinger, who was acting US solicitor general in former US president Bill Clinton’s administration.
“Before the Hobby Lobby ruling, women had guaranteed contraceptive coverage as part of their employment health insurance,” he said. “After today, it is clear that their access to contraception is by no means guaranteed, given the administrative complexities the court has now imposed upon” the US Department of Health and Human Services.
Sotomayor said the majority, which acted on an emergency application, had not only introduced pointless complexity into an already byzantine set of regulations, but had also revised its Hobby Lobby decision.
That decision endorsed an arrangement allowing nonprofit groups to sign a form that would transfer the delivery of free contraception under the Affordable Care Act to others, Sotomayor said. However, Thursday’s order rejected the mandatory use of the forms for Wheaton College in Illinois.
Sotomayor said the ruling reached beyond Wheaton and could lead to similar results at many other nonprofit religious organizations that have similar concerns.
“The issuance of an injunction in this case will presumably entitle hundreds or thousands of other objectors to the same remedy,” she said.
Mark Rienzi, a lawyer at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents Wheaton, said: “The court rightly recognized that Wheaton’s religious community should be allowed to practice its faith free from crushing government fines.”
The college objected to coverage of intrauterine devices and so-called morning-after pills, saying they were akin to abortion. Most scientists disagree.
The court did not announce how the most of the justices had voted, which is typical when it issues unsigned opinions. In the Hobby Lobby case on Monday, Justice Stephen Breyer had joined Sotomayor, Ginsburg and Kagan in dissent.
The majority opinion in the Hobby Lobby case, written by Justice Samuel Alito, seemed to suggest that the forms could play a role in an arrangement that was an acceptable alternative to having employers pay for the coverage. Under the arrangement, insurance companies that receive the forms pay for the coverage on the theory that it costs no more to provide contraception than to pay for pregnancies.
On Thursday, the court’s majority said all Wheaton had to do was notify the government in writing “that it is a nonprofit organization that holds itself out as religious and has religious objections to providing coverage for contraception services.”
The difference between a form sent to insurers and plan administrators on the one hand and a letter sent to the government on the other mattered, the college told the justices, “because it believes, as a religious matter, that signing the form would be impermissibly facilitating abortions and is therefore forbidden.”
“To be sure, free citizens in a diverse nation will have different views about whether signing the form makes someone complicit,” the college’s brief said. “But that is a question of ‘religious and moral philosophy’ for Wheaton,” not the government.
The quoted phrase came from the Hobby Lobby decision.
Sotomayor said the college’s analysis was misguided on several levels.
“The sincerity of Wheaton’s deeply held religious beliefs is beyond refute,” she wrote. “But as a legal matter, Wheaton’s application comes nowhere near the high bar necessary to warrant an emergency injunction from this court.”
The form requires only a statement that the employer has a religious objection to some or all forms of contraception, that it is nonprofit and that it “holds itself out as a religious organization.”
“Rather than availing itself of this simple accommodation, Wheaton filed suit,” ” Sotomayor wrote.
The court majority said that its order would still allow the college’s employees and students “to obtain, without cost, the full range” of contraceptives approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.
On receiving notification from the college, the government would then be free “to facilitate the provision of full contraceptive coverage,” the majority said.
The order said that it was temporary and not the final word on whether the forms were required.
Justice Antonin Scalia would apparently have gone further. He added a cryptic note on Thursday that he “concurs in the result.”
The court issued a similar order in January in a case involving Little Sisters of the Poor, an order of Catholic nuns. There were no noted dissents.
Lower courts have denied requests for injunctions on Wheaton’s objection while the case moves through the courts. The most recent ruling, from the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Chicago on Monday, said no injunction was warranted, given the Supreme Court’s ruling in Hobby Lobby.
The Wheaton suit invoked the US Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, the same law that was at issue in Hobby Lobby. The law applies when the government subjects religious practices to a “substantial burden.”
The college said it should not be second-guessed by the government.
SEEKING CHANGE: A hospital worker said she did not vote in previous elections, but ‘now I can see that maybe my vote can change the system and the country’ Voting closed yesterday across the Solomon Islands in the south Pacific nation’s first general election since the government switched diplomatic allegiance from Taiwan to Beijing and struck a secret security pact that has raised fears of the Chinese navy gaining a foothold in the region. The Solomon Islands’ closer relationship with China and a troubled domestic economy weighed on voters’ minds as they cast their ballots. As many as 420,000 registered voters had their say across 50 national seats. For the first time, the national vote also coincided with elections for eight of the 10 local governments. Esther Maeluma cast her vote in the
Nearly half of China’s major cities are suffering “moderate to severe” levels of subsidence, putting millions of people at risk of flooding, especially as sea levels rise, according to a study of nationwide satellite data released yesterday. The authors of the paper, published by the journal Science, found that 45 percent of China’s urban land was sinking faster than 3mm per year, with 16 percent at more than 10mm per year, driven not only by declining water tables, but also the sheer weight of the built environment. With China’s urban population already in excess of 900 million people, “even a small portion
UNSETTLING IMAGES: The scene took place in front of TV crews covering the Trump trial, with a CNN anchor calling it an ‘emotional and unbelievably disturbing moment’ A man who doused himself in an accelerant and set himself on fire outside the courthouse where former US president Donald Trump is on trial has died, police said yesterday. The New York City Police Department (NYPD) said the man was declared dead by staff at an area hospital. The man was in Collect Pond Park at about 1:30pm on Friday when he took out pamphlets espousing conspiracy theories, tossed them around, then doused himself in an accelerant and set himself on fire, officials and witnesses said. A large number of police officers were nearby when it happened. Some officers and bystanders rushed
HYPOCRISY? The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs yesterday asked whether Biden was talking about China or the US when he used the word ‘xenophobic’ US President Joe Biden on Wednesday called for a hike in steel tariffs on China, accusing Beijing of cheating as he spoke at a campaign event in Pennsylvania. Biden accused China of xenophobia, too, in a speech to union members in Pittsburgh. “They’re not competing, they’re cheating. They’re cheating and we’ve seen the damage here in America,” Biden said. Chinese steel companies “don’t need to worry about making a profit because the Chinese government is subsidizing them so heavily,” he said. Biden said he had called for the US Trade Representative to triple the tariff rates for Chinese steel and aluminum if Beijing was