Overview of the Lawsuits Challenging the Affordable Care Act’s No Cost-Sharing Contraceptive Coverage Benefit

77 lawsuits have been filed in federal court challenging the Affordable Care Act’s no cost-sharing contraceptive coverage benefit. 23 cases are closed; 54 cases are currently pending. For-profit companies are among those who are pushing for the courts to allow bosses to make women’s reproductive health decisions.

Full Document with Chart

Cases brought by non-profits:

34 cases have been brought by non-profit organizations. Six (6) cases were withdrawn by the plaintiffs and 15 cases were dismissed and those decisions were not appealed, so 13 of the non-profit cases are pending.
For the most part, courts have dismissed the non-profit cases as not being ripe or because plaintiffs lack standing. This is because non-profits with religious objections to providing contraceptive coverage were given a delay in implementing the benefit and the Administration was undertaking rulemaking on an “accommodation” for non-profit organizations with religious objections to providing the benefit. The Administration finalized its rule on June 28 – so far, 10 non-profit organizations have said that they are not satisfied with the accommodation and intend to proceed with their lawsuits. Two cases were dismissed by the district courts as moot.

Cases brought by for-profits:

41 of the cases have been filed by for-profit companies, ranging from a mining company to a crafts store chain to an HVAC company. One case was even brought by a business owner who currently has no employees. Two – Geneva College and Weingartz – also include non-profit plaintiffs. One company withdrew its initial case, but later filed another case in a different circuit so 40 for-profit cases are pending.
The cases brought by for-profits are moving quickly because these companies were not eligible for the delay, and, for the most part, are already required to provide the contraceptive coverage benefit. The courts are addressing these, and reaching different outcomes.

One court has reached the merits – a district court granted the government’s motion to dismiss in one case, O’Brien, which is now on appeal to the 8th Circuit. The district court recognized that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (the federal law the companies are relying upon to challenge the benefit) “is not a means to force one’s religious practices upon others.” The 8th Circuit has issued a stay pending appeal.
In 7 cases, courts have denied for-profit companies’ request for temporary relief, meaning those companies must provide the benefit.
27 companies so far have some form of temporary relief, which means the companies do not have to provide the benefit while they pursue their claims in court. (In some of those cases, the district court denied relief, but the appellate court issued temporary relief as an appeal moves forward. In others, district courts granted relief that was unopposed by the government, because they are awaiting a ruling by the appeals court in a separate for-profit case).
No court of appeals has reached the merits.

Two courts of appeals have refused to delay enforcement of the benefit.

Conestoga (3rd Circuit Court of Appeals
Autocam; Eden Foods (6th Circuit Court of Appeals)

Three courts of appeals have given temporary relief.

Gilardi (D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals)
Korte; Grote (7th Circuit Court of Appeals)
O’Brien; Annex Medical (8th Circuit Court of Appeals)

One court of appeals reversed a lower court’s denial of injunctive relief and sent the case back to the district court, which granted a preliminary injunction.

Hobby Lobby (10th Circuit Court of Appeals)

Cases brought by others:

2 cases have been brought by plaintiffs that are neither for-profit companies nor non-profit organizations.

Wieland was brought by Missouri State Representative Paul Wieland, a member of the Missouri House of Representatives. This is the first challenge to the contraceptive coverage benefit by an employee who receives insurance coverage through an employer that is complying with the requirement.
State of Nebraska was brought by officials representing the states of Nebraska, South Carolina, Michigan, Texas, Florida, Ohio, and Oklahoma. Following the government’s issuance of the final contraceptive coverage rule, the plaintiffs asked the 8th Circuit to dismiss their case, which the court did.

Possible Supreme Court review

2 for-profit cases could potentially reach the U.S. Supreme Court this term.

The federal government will decide by September 25 whether to seek Supreme Court review of the 10th Circuit’s en banc decision in Hobby Lobby.
The plaintiffs in Conestoga said they intend to seek Supreme Court review of the 3rd Circuit’s decision to deny a preliminary injunction. They should have until November 12 to do so.

1 non-profit has asked for Supreme Court review. Liberty University asked the Supreme Court to hear its challenge to the individual and employer responsibility provisions of the health care law, which it claims include the contraceptive coverage benefit.