Cert Granted in Non-Profit Contraceptive Mandate Cases

2015-11-06 Thread Friedman, Howard M. 
The Supreme Court today granted review in 7 cases challenging the Affordable 
Care Act contraceptive mandate accommodation for religious non-profits. More at 
http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2015/11/supreme-court-grants-review-in-7-cases.html

Howard Friedman
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Re: Cert Granted in Non-Profit Contraceptive Mandate Cases

2015-11-06 Thread Marty Lederman 
Note that the Court did not grant on the discrimination-based questions.

More here:

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/11/court-grants-all-seven-nonprofit.html

*Court grants all seven nonprofit petitions in contraceptive coverage
cases, henceforth to be collectively referred to as "Zubik v. Burwell"*

Marty Lederman

Today the Court decided not to decide
 among
the seven petitions in the contraceptive cases--it granted (and
consolidated) them all on the RFRA question.  The Court did *not *grant on
the two questions alleging that the government has impermissibly
discriminated among religious organizations, one of which (in *Zubik*) was
nominally a RFRA question and the other of which (in *Little Sisters*) was
framed as a First Amendment question.

The case will be argued some time between March 21 and March 30.
Presumably only one of the five counsel of record for petitioners will
present oral argument--if I had to guess, it'll be Paul Clement or Noel
Francisco.  (The Court itself ordinarily leaves it to the parties in such a
situation to figure out a way to decide which counsel will argue.)  The
Court has also asked the parties

"to
submit a joint proposal for briefing on the merits that will keep the
number of briefs to a minimum and avoid repetition of argument."  Therefore
I don't think we should expect to see 400+ pages of party briefs topside
and 200+ pages on reply.  The petitioners might even decide to submit a
single, unified brief at each stage.

The decision of the Court will likely be captioned, and popularly referred
to, as No. 14-1418, *Zubik v. Burwell*, which was the first of the
petitions to be filed.

*Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related cases*


Posted 4:18 PM by Marty Lederman [link]


On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Friedman, Howard M. <
howard.fried...@utoledo.edu> wrote:

> The Supreme Court today granted review in 7 cases challenging the
> Affordable Care Act contraceptive mandate accommodation for religious
> non-profits. More at
> http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2015/11/supreme-court-grants-review-in-7-cases.html
>
>
> Howard Friedman
>
> ___
> To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
> wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

RE: Cert Granted in Non-Profit Contraceptive Mandate Cases

2015-11-06 Thread Friedman, Howard M. 
Nor did it grant review of the issue raised in Zubik that the narrow total 
exemption for houses of worship somehow divides the Catholic Church in 
violation of RFRA.

From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] 
on behalf of Marty Lederman [lederman.ma...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 4:27 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Cert Granted in Non-Profit Contraceptive Mandate Cases

Note that the Court did not grant on the discrimination-based questions.

More here:

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/11/court-grants-all-seven-nonprofit.html

Court grants all seven nonprofit petitions in contraceptive coverage cases, 
henceforth to be collectively referred to as "Zubik v. Burwell"

Marty Lederman

Today the Court decided not to 
decide<http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/110615zr_j4ek.pdf> among 
the seven petitions in the contraceptive cases--it granted (and consolidated) 
them all on the RFRA question.  The Court did not grant on the two questions 
alleging that the government has impermissibly discriminated among religious 
organizations, one of which (in Zubik) was nominally a RFRA question and the 
other of which (in Little Sisters) was framed as a First Amendment question.

The case will be argued some time between March 21 and March 30.  Presumably 
only one of the five counsel of record for petitioners will present oral 
argument--if I had to guess, it'll be Paul Clement or Noel Francisco.  (The 
Court itself ordinarily leaves it to the parties in such a situation to figure 
out a way to decide which counsel will argue.)  The Court has also asked the 
parties<http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/14-1418-et-al.-RFRA-Briefing-Proposal-Request-Letter.pdf>
 "to submit a joint proposal for briefing on the merits that will keep the 
number of briefs to a minimum and avoid repetition of argument."  Therefore I 
don't think we should expect to see 400+ pages of party briefs topside and 200+ 
pages on reply.  The petitioners might even decide to submit a single, unified 
brief at each stage.

The decision of the Court will likely be captioned, and popularly referred to, 
as No. 14-1418, Zubik v. Burwell, which was the first of the petitions to be 
filed.

Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related 
cases<http://balkin.blogspot.com/2014/02/compendium-of-posts-on-hobby-lobby-and.html>

Posted 4:18 PM by Marty Lederman [link]
<http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/11/court-grants-all-seven-nonprofit.html>

On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Friedman, Howard M. 
<howard.fried...@utoledo.edu<mailto:howard.fried...@utoledo.edu>> wrote:
The Supreme Court today granted review in 7 cases challenging the Affordable 
Care Act contraceptive mandate accommodation for religious non-profits. More at 
http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2015/11/supreme-court-grants-review-in-7-cases.html

Howard Friedman

___
To post, send message to 
Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.