Justices appear split in arguments on contraceptive-coverage opt-out
Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court appeared divided Wednesday as they considered the legality of an opt-out procedure for religiously affiliated organizations that don’t want to provide contraceptive insurance coverage for their employees.
A 4-4 tie in the case, Zubik v. Burwell, “appeared to be a real possibility,” the New York Times reports. Coverage by USA Today and the Washington Post also said the court could end up divided on whether the opt-out process violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Religious groups claim a violation because participating in the process leads to contraceptive coverage for their employees by third parties, making the religious groups complicit in sin.
RFRA provides that the government must have a compelling reason for a law that substantially burdens religious beliefs, and it must show the law is the least restrictive way of furthering the government’s interest.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, considered the swing vote, was “sphinx-like” during much of Solicitor General Donald Verrilli’s defense of the opt-out procedure, according to coverage by Think Progress. But Kennedy did say it seems there is a substantial burden on the religious groups, and religious groups could be right about the government “hijacking” their insurance plans to provide coverage. “It’s a good bet that Kennedy will vote against Team Birth Control,” Think Progress concludes.
A tie would leave in place federal appeals court rulings. Only one of the circuits—the St. Louis-based 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals—has ruled against the government.
