![Federal judge blocks contraception mandate enforcement for Catholic college](https://www.jurist.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/03/shutterstock_657639088.jpg)
[JURIST] A judge for the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida [official website] on Tuesday issued a temporary ruling [text, PDF] blocking the enforcement of the contraception mandate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act [text] against a Florida Roman Catholic college. The order, which came in the form of a preliminary injunction, will remain in effect until the college goes to trial in his court. The dispute centers on new rules [text, PDF] proposed by the government in August that attempt to give religious non-profit groups an exemption from the health care law’s mandate. These rules, according to US District Judge James Moody Jr., do not do enough in their provision of exemption. Under the new rules, in addition to notifying the Department of Health and Human Services of an organization’s claiming of religious exemption, organizations are also required to tell the government about their health coverage plans for their employees and provide it with contact information for the insurer, thus allowing the department to arrange for free contraceptive coverage for female employees. Florida Roman Catholic college Ave Maria University is one of multiple organizations that has contested this requirement [SCOTUSblog report], stating that forcing them to take any steps to allow the implementation of the mandate would violate their religions.
The Supreme Court’s rulings on the contraceptive mandate [JURIST backgrounder] and the mandate itself have generated controversy [JURIST op-ed]. The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) [official website] issued the proposed rules [JURIST report] in August in response to the Supreme Court’s rulings in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Burwell [SCOTUS backgrounders], which held that “closely held” corporations cannot be required to provide contraceptive coverage to their female workers if the corporation’s owners have religious objections. Louise Melling, deputy legal directer of the American Civil Liberties Union [advocacy website] stated of the court’s ruling in Hobby Lobby [press release] that “[r]eligious freedom is a fundamental right, but that freedom does not include the right to impose beliefs on others. In its ruling today, the Court simply got it wrong.” Barbara Green, one of the founders of Hobby Lobby, said [press release] that “[o]ur family is overjoyed by the Supreme Court’s decision. Today the nation’s highest court has re-affirmed the vital importance of religious liberty as one of our country’s founding principles. The Court’s decision is a victory, not just for our family business, but for all who seek to live out their faith. We are grateful to God and to those who have supported us on this difficult journey.”