__ U.S. __ (2016), 14-1418, Zubik v. Burwell

Docket Nº:14-1418, 14-1453, 14-1505, 15-35, 15-105, 15-119, 15-191
Citation:__ U.S. __, 136 S.Ct. 1557, 194 L.Ed.2d 696, 84 U.S.L.W. 4257
Opinion Judge:PER CURIAM.
Party Name:DAVID A. ZUBIK, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. SYLVIA BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.; PRIESTS FOR LIFE, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.; ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF WASHINGTON, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. SYLVIA BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.; EAST TEXAS BAPTIST UNIVER...
Attorney:Noel Francisco argued the cause for petitioners (Nos. 14-1418, 14-1453, & 14-150). Paul D. Clement argued the cause for petitioners (Nos. 15-35, 15-105, 15-119 & 15-191). Donald B. Verrilli, Jr. argued the cause for respondent.
Judge Panel:Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE GINSBURG joins, concurring.
Case Date:May 16, 2016
Court:United States Supreme Court

Page __

__ U.S. __ (2016)

136 S.Ct. 1557, 194 L.Ed.2d 696, 84 U.S.L.W. 4257, 26 Fla.L.Weekly Fed. S 127

DAVID A. ZUBIK, ET AL., PETITIONERS

v.

SYLVIA BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.;

PRIESTS FOR LIFE, ET AL., PETITIONERS

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.;

ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF WASHINGTON, ET AL., PETITIONERS

v.

SYLVIA BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.;

EAST TEXAS BAPTIST UNIVERSITY, ET AL., PETITIONERS

v.

SYLVIA BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.;

LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR HOME FOR THE AGED, DENVER, COLORADO, ET AL., PETITIONERS

v.

SYLVIA BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.;

SOUTHERN NAZARENE UNIVERSITY, ET AL., PETITIONERS

v.

SYLVIA BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.;

AND

GENEVA COLLEGE, PETITIONER

v.

SYLVIA BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL

Nos. 14-1418, 14-1453, 14-1505, 15-35, 15-105, 15-119, 15-191

United States Supreme Court

May 16, 2016

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

Noel Francisco argued the cause for petitioners (Nos. 14-1418, 14-1453, & 14-150).

Paul D. Clement argued the cause for petitioners (Nos. 15-35, 15-105, 15-119 & 15-191).

Donald B. Verrilli, Jr. argued the cause for respondent.

Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan.

OPINION

[194 L.Ed.2d 697] PER CURIAM.

Petitioners are primarily nonprofit organizations that provide health insurance to their employees. Federal regulations require petitioners to cover certain contraceptives as part of [194 L.Ed.2d 698] their health plans, unless petitioners submit a form either to their insurer or to the Federal Government, stating that they object on religious grounds to providing contraceptive coverage. Petitioners allege that submitting this notice substantially burdens the exercise of their religion, in violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 107 Stat. 1488, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb et seq.

Following oral argument, the Court requested supplemental briefing from the parties addressing " whether contraceptive coverage could be provided to petitioners' employees, through petitioners' insurance companies, without any such notice from petitioners." Post, p. ___, 194 L.Ed.2d 599. Both petitioners and the Government now confirm that such an option is feasible. Petitioners have clarified that their religious exercise is not infringed where they " need to do nothing more than contract for a plan that does not include coverage for some or all forms of contraception," even if their employees receive cost-free contraceptive coverage from the same insurance company. Supplemental Brief for Petitioners 4. The Government has confirmed that the challenged procedures " for employers with insured plans could be modified to operate in the manner posited in the Court's order while still ensuring that the affected women receive contraceptive coverage seamlessly, together with the rest of their health coverage." Supplemental Brief for Respondents 14-15.

In light of the positions asserted by the parties in their supplemental briefs, the Court vacates the judgments below and remands to the respective United States Courts of Appeals for the Third, Fifth, Tenth, and D. C. Circuits. Given the gravity of the dispute and the substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties, the parties on remand should be afforded an opportunity to arrive at an approach going forward that accommodates petitioners' religious exercise while at the same time ensuring that women covered by petitioners' health plans " receive full and equal health coverage, including contraceptive coverage." Id., at 1. We anticipate that the Courts of Appeals will allow the parties sufficient time to resolve any outstanding issues between them.

The Court finds the foregoing approach more suitable than addressing the significantly clarified views of the parties in the first instance. Although there may still be areas of disagreement between the parties on issues of implementation, the importance of those areas of potential concern is uncertain, as is the necessity of this Court's involvement at this point to resolve them. This Court has taken similar action in other cases in the past. See, e.g., Madison County v. Oneida Indian Nation of N.Y., 562 U.S. 42, 43, 131 S.Ct. 704, 178 L.Ed.2d 587 (2011) ( per curiam...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP
78 practice notes
  • Moral Exemptions and Accommodations for Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act
    • United States
    • Federal Register November 15, 2018
    • November 15, 2018
    ...substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties'' that had been filed in supplemental briefs. Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557, 1560 (2016). The Court stated that it anticipated that, on remand, the Courts of Appeals would ``allow the parties sufficient time to res......
  • Religious Exemptions and Accommodations for Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act
    • United States
    • Federal Register November 15, 2018
    • November 15, 2018
    ...those cases went to the Supreme Court. See, for example, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2751 (2014); Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557 \2\ The references in this document to ``contraception,'' ``contraceptive,'' ``contraceptive coverage,'' or ``contraceptive services'' gene......
  • Daniel in the Lions Den: A Structural Reconsideration of Religious Exemptions from Nondiscrimination Laws Since Obergefell.
    • United States
    • Stanford Law Review Vol. 70 Nbr. 1, January 2018
    • January 1, 2018
    ...Application for Injunction Pending Appellate Review at 11 Wheaton Coll, 134 S. Ct. 2806 (No. 13A1284))); see also Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557, 1559-60 (2016) (per curiam) (vacating and remanding RFRA cases involving similar objections to those at issue in Wheaton College in order to g......
  • TIERS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE.
    • United States
    • University of Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 166 Nbr. 1, December 2017
    • December 1, 2017
    ...entitled to religious exemptions under RFRA. The scope of required accommodations remained in doubt, however, after Zubik v. Bur-well, 136 S. Ct. 1557 (2016), vacated and remanded a court of appeals' decision without squarely resolving disputed issues. On October 6, 2017, the Trump Administ......
  • Free signup to view additional results
41 cases
  • State of Texas v. United States, 121819 FED5, 19-10011
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
    • December 18, 2019
    ...4980H. [2] The women's preventative care provision was at issue in a trio of recent Supreme Court cases. See Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S.Ct. 1557 (2016); Wheaton College v. Burwell, 573 U.S. 958 (2014); Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. 682 (2014); see also ......
  • 945 F.3d 355 (5th Cir. 2019), 19-10011, State of Texas v. United States
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
    • December 18, 2019
    ...care provision was at issue in a trio of recent Supreme Court cases. See Zubik v. Burwell, __ U.S. __, 136 S.Ct. 1557, 194 L.Ed.2d 696 (2016); Wheaton College v. Burwell, 573 U.S. 958, 134 S.Ct. 2806, 189 L.Ed.2d 856 (2014); Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573&......
  • Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. President United States of America, 071219 FED3, 17-3752
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    • July 12, 2019
    ...to covering contraceptive services] consistent with the Wheaton interim order." Id. at 41, 323. In Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S.Ct. 1557 (2016) (per curiam), the Supreme Court addressed the petitioners' assertions that "submitting [the Accommodation] notice ......
  • 281 F.Supp.3d 553 (E.D.Pa. 2017), C. A. 17-4540, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Trump
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 3th Circuit Western District of Pennsylvania
    • December 15, 2017
    ...health plans ‘receive full and equal health coverage, including contraceptive coverage.’ " Zubik v. Burwell, __ U.S. __, 136 S.Ct. 1557, 1560, 194 L.Ed.2d 696 (2016). The Agencies then issued a Request for Information (" RFI" ) seeking public comment on......
  • Free signup to view additional results
6 firm's commentaries
  • ERISA Newsletter - First Quarter 2019
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • April 3, 2019
    ...approach that can both accommodate religious exercise and ensure that women receive contraceptive coverage (Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557). In 2017, the Agencies issued two interim final rules that, generally speaking, would allow many non-profit and for-profit organizations to seek exe......
  • ERISA Newsletter
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • April 12, 2019
    ...approach that can both accommodate religious exercise and ensure that women receive contraceptive coverage (Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557). In 2017, the Agencies issued two interim final rules that, generally speaking, would allow many non-profit and for-profit organizations to seek exe......
  • Nationwide Injunction Halts Exemptions and Accommodations to the ACA Contraceptive Coverage Mandate
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • January 25, 2019
    ...approach that can both accommodate religious exercise and ensure that women receive contraceptive coverage (Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557). In 2017, the Agencies issued two interim final rules that, generally speaking, would allow many non-profit and for-profit organizations to seek exe......
  • Nationwide Injunction Halts Exemptions and Accommodations to the ACA Contraceptive Coverage Mandate
    • United States
    • LexBlog United States
    • January 25, 2019
    ...approach that can both accommodate religious exercise and ensure that women receive contraceptive coverage (Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557). In 2017, the Agencies issued two interim final rules that, generally speaking, would allow many non-profit and for-profit organizations to seek exe......
  • Free signup to view additional results
28 books & journal articles
  • Daniel in the Lions Den: A Structural Reconsideration of Religious Exemptions from Nondiscrimination Laws Since Obergefell.
    • United States
    • Stanford Law Review Vol. 70 Nbr. 1, January 2018
    • January 1, 2018
    ...Application for Injunction Pending Appellate Review at 11 Wheaton Coll, 134 S. Ct. 2806 (No. 13A1284))); see also Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557, 1559-60 (2016) (per curiam) (vacating and remanding RFRA cases involving similar objections to those at issue in Wheaton College in order to g......
  • TIERS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE.
    • United States
    • University of Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 166 Nbr. 1, December 2017
    • December 1, 2017
    ...entitled to religious exemptions under RFRA. The scope of required accommodations remained in doubt, however, after Zubik v. Bur-well, 136 S. Ct. 1557 (2016), vacated and remanded a court of appeals' decision without squarely resolving disputed issues. On October 6, 2017, the Trump Administ......
  • Title IX's reproductive remedies.
    • United States
    • Columbia Journal of Gender and Law Vol. 32 Nbr. 2, March 2017
    • March 22, 2017
    ...and Human Services, 801 F.3d 927 (8th Cir. 2015) (upholding plaintiffs' RFRA challenge to the accommodation). (139) Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557 (2016). (140) Justice Scalia's replacement yet unconfirmed, the remaining four Justices of the Hobby Lobby majority (Justices Alito, Kennedy,......
  • THE RIGHT FAMILY.
    • United States
    • Columbia Journal of Gender and Law Vol. 39 Nbr. 1, January 2020
    • January 1, 2020
    ...provision of the coverage even if they were not paying for it. See Wheaton Coll. v. Burwell, 134 S. Ct. 2806 (2014); Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557 (2016) (vacating and remanding to Courts of Appeals to decide on supplemental briefing describing a new accommodation option). See also Zubi......
  • Free signup to view additional results
3 provisions
  • Moral Exemptions and Accommodations for Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act
    • United States
    • Federal Register November 15, 2018
    • November 15, 2018
    ...substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties'' that had been filed in supplemental briefs. Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557, 1560 (2016). The Court stated that it anticipated that, on remand, the Courts of Appeals would ``allow the parties sufficient time to res......
  • Religious Exemptions and Accommodations for Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act
    • United States
    • Federal Register November 15, 2018
    • November 15, 2018
    ...those cases went to the Supreme Court. See, for example, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2751 (2014); Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557 \2\ The references in this document to ``contraception,'' ``contraceptive,'' ``contraceptive coverage,'' or ``contraceptive services'' gene......
  • Coverage for Contraceptive Services
    • United States
    • Federal Register July 22, 2016
    • July 22, 2016
    ...contraceptives without cost sharing. This information is being solicited in light of the Supreme Court's opinion in Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557 (2016). The Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Labor, and the Treasury (collectively, the Departments) invite public comments vi......