New York Times

January 25, 2014

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday extended a temporary order from Justice Sonia Sotomayor barring the Obama administration from enforcing the contraception coverage requirement of the Affordable Care Act against an order of Roman Catholic nuns.

The justices said their order should not be construed as an expression of their views on the merits of the case. Nevertheless, it was a setback for the White House, the Justice Department and federal health officials, who say women will benefit immensely from access to contraceptives at no cost.

Donald B. Verrilli Jr., the solicitor general, had specifically asked the Supreme Court not to grant the injunction it granted on Friday. In a brief filed with the court on Jan. 3, Mr. Verrilli said the nuns of the order, the Little Sisters of the Poor, “fail to satisfy the demanding standard for the extraordinary and rarely granted relief they seek: an original injunction from this court.”

Federal rules issued under the health law require most employers to provide insurance coverage for contraception. The nuns said the requirement was offensive to their religious beliefs.

The nuns said an accommodation allowing them to opt out of the requirement — by issuing a certification to an insurance company to offer the coverage independently — also made them complicit in immoral conduct.

In the order on Friday, the Supreme Court said that the administration must not enforce the contraceptive coverage requirement against the nuns while the case is pending before a federal appeals court. In addition, the court said that the Little Sisters “need not use the form prescribed by the government” to qualify for an exemption.

Mark L. Rienzi, a lawyer at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, who represented the nuns, said: “We are delighted that the Supreme Court has issued this order protecting the Little Sisters. The injunction means that they will not be forced to sign and deliver the controversial government forms authorizing and instructing their benefits administrator to provide contraceptives.”

Mr. Rienzi said the order “also provides protection to more than 400 other Catholic organizations that receive health benefits” through the same health plan, the Christian Brothers Employee Benefit Trust.

The Supreme Court laid down one condition for granting the injunction: The Little Sisters must “inform the secretary of health and human services in writing that they are nonprofit organizations that hold themselves out as religious and have religious objections to providing coverage for contraceptive services.”

Adele Keim, a lawyer at the Becket Fund, said the nuns would have no problem satisfying that condition. What they object to, she said, is signing a government form that also authorizes their health plan administrator to “process claims for contraceptive coverage.”

The Obama administration contends that the words on the form have no practical effect on the nuns because they provide health benefits through a “church plan,” and such plans are exempt from regulations that apply to most employer-sponsored insurance.

A Justice Department spokesman, commenting on the court’s action on Friday, said, “As the order indicates, this injunction applies only to the plaintiffs and is not a ruling on the merits of their case.” The Little Sisters “have always been eligible for an accommodation from the contraceptive coverage requirement,” the spokesman said.

On Dec. 31, hours before the contraceptive coverage requirement took effect, Justice Sotomayor temporarily blocked enforcement of that part of the law against the Little Sisters, an order that operates nursing homes for low-income people in the United States and around the world.

The Supreme Court has already agreed to hear two cases involving for-profit companies that object to the requirement. The companies, Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties, say the requirement gives them three unpalatable options: They can pay for insurance coverage that their owners say they find objectionable; they can pay penalties for failing to do so; or they can drop coverage entirely and pay a different penalty.

The Justice Department has said that “a secular company does not engage in any exercise of religion” and “may not impose its owners’ personal religious beliefs on its employees.”

If the Supreme Court accepts the companies’ arguments, the department says, it would “cripple the government’s ability to solve national problems through laws of general application” like the Affordable Care Act.