What does
this mean for religious organizations? The order
itself merely means the Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged, Denver,
Colorado, and its coapplicants will not have to pay fines that would otherwise
be imposed as a penalty for not offering the contraceptive coverage. And the
stay will only be in place during the appeal, if even that long.
Sotomayor’s
order comes in the wake of several lower courts issuing similar orders
preventing the enforcement of this part of the Affordable Care Act. The
particular case she weighed in on came from the 10th Circuit, for which
Sotomayor is assigned certain responsibilities that include deciding questions
like these. The 10th Circuit had denied the stay, so the Little Sisters of the
Poor appealed to the Supreme Court for a temporary stay. The White House reportedly stated that it doesn’t interpret the law to require these specific groups to provide the disputed coverage because the law does not apply to self-funded church plans.
While the
order’s applicability is narrow, there are two major issues involved in the
challenges brought across the country by almost 100 organizations. Both sets of
cases raise questions about what kinds of entities can raise religious
objections to generally applicable laws, namely the Affordable Care Act’s
requirement that nonexempt employers—there are exceptions for most types of
religious entities—provide insurance coverage for birth control.
The first
set of cases is brought by for-profit corporations that base their claims on
their owners' religious beliefs. Religious organizations should keep a watch on
this group because the resolution of its challenges will necessarily involve
discussion of what it means to be a religious or secular organization and the
extent to which institutions we typically consider secular can seek the
protections we typically consider reserve for individuals and religious
organizations.
The second
group of challenges was brought by religiously affiliated nonprofits. These
include hospitals, universities, and other groups that are not religious
organizations themselves but are run by religious organizations or out of some
religious motivation by their founders. This is more obviously relevant to
traditional religious organizations, which face questions about how to organize
their various ministries. The final outcome of these cases could affect how
religious institutions structure their schools, healthcare facilities, and
other charitable-outreach organizations if they seek to receive as much
protection against being forced to violate their religious convictions by
otherwise-generally applicable laws. It’s also important because it could have
ramifications on laws that do not have the types of specific cutouts for
churches, mosques, synagogues, and similar institutions that the Affordable
Care Act does.
Notable to this lawyer: Sotomayor's order, entered on New Year’s Eve, requires the government to respond by 10:00 a.m. Friday morning. I imagine that put a damper on some government attorneys’ celebrating Tuesday night.
Links:
http://www.becketfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/13A691-Little-Sisters-v-Sebelius-Order.pdf
Have a question about legal issues affecting religious organizations? Let me know at questions@lawmeetsgospel.com or @LawMeetsGospel.
Have a question about legal issues affecting religious organizations? Let me know at questions@lawmeetsgospel.com or @LawMeetsGospel.
No comments:
Post a Comment