Under an Affordable Care Act policy, most insurance plans must cover contraception. But for-profit corporations (like Hobby Lobby) and non-profit institutions (including prominent universities) have argued that the policy should not apply to them because they have religious objections to providing the coverage to their employees and students.

Now, new Trump administration regulations let bosses and universities use religion to deny their employees and students access to contraception. 

Religion is not an excuse to allow these organizations to deny women access to healthcare. We have fought back in dozens of cases, including a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration rules.

From the beginning, houses of worship have been given an exemption from the general rule that health insurance plans must cover contraception. Houses of worship do not have to (and have never had to) provide their employees insurance coverage for contraception. In addition, religiously affiliated non-profit institutions, including universities, were provided with an accommodation to the coverage requirement. They could have refused to provide their students and employees with insurance coverage for contraception so long as they stated their objection in writing. The government would have then arranged for a third-party to pay for and provide the coverage instead. 

The Trump administration regulations create a sweeping exemption and now any employer or university can use religion as an excuse to deny its students or employees insurance coverage for birth control.


Challenges By For-Profit Corporations

The owners of for-profit corporations filed dozens of cases challenging the coverage requirement, arguing that they were also entitled to an exemption because providing contraception coverage for their employees violated their religious beliefs. One of the cases, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, ended up at the Supreme Court. We filed over a dozen briefs in those cases, and in the Supreme Court, we filed a brief on behalf of nearly 30 religious organizations, arguing that religious freedom has never included the right to deprive other people of their rights.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court ruled that for-profit corporations could invoke the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) to refuse to provide otherwise required health benefits—in this case, insurance coverage for contraception—based on their owners’ religious beliefs. 

In response, the government extended the accommodation to closely held corporations.

Learn more about Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores.


Challenges By Non-Profit Organizations

The accommodation failed to appease many non-profit institutions, including universities, and dozens of these groups challenged it in court. They argue that the mere act of filling out a form—a form relieving them of the need to comply with the policy—violates their religious freedom. They want a full exemption that strips their employees and students of contraception coverage altogether. We filed briefs in most of these cases, and in one case, University of Notre Dame v. Price, we represented students whose coverage was at risk. 

IMG_1993.jpg

Nearly every court of appeals rejected the non-profit organizations’ argument and upheld the accommodation. The Supreme Court, in Zubik v. Price, however, side-stepped the issue and instead sent all the cases back down to the lower courts and urged them to consider other possible accommodations. We filed a brief in Zubik on behalf of 240 students, faculty, and staff at religiously affiliated universities, discussing the importance of providing contraceptive coverage to those who work or study at these institutions. 

After requesting information from the public, the Obama administration concluded that there was no feasible alternative accommodation. Unfortunately, no resolution has been reached and the employees' and students' access to contraception remains in limbo. New Trump administration regulations will add even more uncertainty to the issue. 

We fought on behalf of students in University of Notre Dame v. Priceto make sure they—and all women like them—have affordable, seamless access to contraception.


Challenges To The Trump Administration Regulations

In May 2017, President Trump signed a "religious freedom" executive order  aimed in part at attacking women’s access to birth control. The executive order started the process to roll back the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage rule. In October 2017, the Trump administration issued regulations that created a sweeping religious exemption—any corporation or university can use religion to deny their employees and students coverage for birth control. 

On October 31, Americans United and National Women's Law Center filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s contraception coverage regulations. In Shiraef v. Hargan, we are fighting on behalf of five students and employees to ensure religion isn’t used as an excuse to deny access to their birth control. We will continue to fight—in court and in the policy arena—to make our clients and all women like them have affordable, seamless access to contraception. Women’s health and equality and religious freedom are at stake.

On December 5, we filed public comments to tell the Trump Administration that these new rules were unfair, unconstitutional, and harmful. And we joined our allies to deliver over 500,000 comments from people across the country—including Americans United supporters—who also think that attacking women’s access to healthcare is wrong. 

Religious freedom does not give anyone the right to deny women access to birth control. Taking away access to contraception—a core part of women’s health care—is discrimination, plain and simple.