Mirror of Justice

A blog dedicated to the development of Catholic legal theory.
Affiliated with the Program on Church, State & Society at Notre Dame Law School.

Monday, March 19, 2012

There's Much More to the Contraception-Mandate Litigation Than the Smith Case

The lawsuits brought against HHS over the contraception mandate raise interesting issues under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and under the Free Exercise Clause insofar as various nonreligious exceptions made in the statute and by HHS undercut the mandate's "general applicability" under Employment Division v. Smith.  I think that the suits by religious organizations have a good prospect on the merits if the Administration doesn't cure significant problems with the narrow coverage of the existing and proposed religious exemptions (although I don't think the claims made for general commercial businesses have much of a chance).  What I do know is that there's a lot more to the issue than is indicated in this piece, just published in Commonweal, which cites the Smith case in favor of the mandate and then stops.  As sometimes happens with student exams, I found myself wondering whether the last few pages of the piece had gotten lost somewhere.

https://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2012/03/theres-much-more-to-the-contraception-mandate-litigation-than-the-smith-case-.html

Berg, Thomas | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515a9a69e20163030746c8970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference There's Much More to the Contraception-Mandate Litigation Than the Smith Case :

Comments


                                                        Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Mr. Berg,

Could you elaborate on why you believe "general commercial businesses" don't stand much of a chance?

In my (limited) understanding of the law, RFRA applies to all governmental action that burdens free exercise. So, the government would have to show a compelling interest to force the Catholic business owner to provide contraception coverage in his or her employees' insurance plans and must further show that such a mandate is narrowly tailored.

So, my question is, how is the analysis different for a religious institution than for a Catholic employer engaged in a "secular" business activity?

Here's a complaint filed by an Catholic employer in Missouri: http://c0391070.cdn2.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/pdf/aclj-complaint-obrien-v-hhs-obama-abortion-pill-mandate.pdf