Obama-Appointed Judge Rules Against Little Sisters of the Poor in Long-Running Contraceptive Mandate Dispute

A federal judge has ruled against the Little Sisters of the Poor, a Catholic religious order that cares for the elderly poor, in their challenge to federal mandates requiring abortion and contraceptive coverage in employee healthcare plans.

The decision comes despite the Supreme Court previously upholding the sisters’ exemptions, and the Little Sisters have pledged to continue their legal fight.

The ruling was issued by U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Judge Wendy Beetlestone, an Obama appointee, who sided with Pennsylvania and New Jersey. 

She determined that the Trump administration’s religious conscience rule—which had allowed the Little Sisters to bypass Affordable Care Act contraceptive requirements—was “arbitrary [and] capricious” and failed to follow proper federal procedures, vacating the exemptions “in their entirety.”

This ruling reopens disputes over exemptions established during the first Trump administration, which the Supreme Court upheld in 2020. 

That decision had allowed religious organizations, including the Little Sisters, to refrain from providing abortion and contraceptive coverage in employee healthcare plans.

Diana Thomson, senior attorney with the Becket legal advocacy group representing the Little Sisters, explained that Pennsylvania and New Jersey pursued arguments not raised during the Supreme Court case. 

“Instead of dropping the case, Pennsylvania and New Jersey revitalized their cutting-floor arguments that they chose not to pursue at the Supreme Court last time and brought them in the district court,” she said.

Becket characterized the district court’s ruling as an attempt to circumvent the Supreme Court’s prior approval of the exemptions. 

Thomson added, “The court is trying to find a loophole to the 2020 Supreme Court ruling.”

Mark Rienzi, president of Becket and lead attorney for the Little Sisters, criticized the court for avoiding constitutional questions and prolonging litigation. 

“It is absurd to think the Little Sisters might need yet another trip to the Supreme Court to end what has now been more than a dozen years of litigation over the same issue,” he said, per The Post Millennial.

The original lawsuit was filed by New Jersey and Pennsylvania against multiple federal agencies and officials, with the Little Sisters participating as “defendant-intervenors.” 

The states have long sought to compel the religious group to include abortion and contraceptive coverage in employee plans.

Thomson noted that the Trump administration may also appeal the ruling. 

“I assume the Trump administration will appeal also. But the Little Sisters’ appeal is already on file,” she said. 

Rienzi emphasized the sisters’ commitment to continue protecting their religious mission and caring for the elderly.

 “We will appeal all the way to the Supreme Court if we have to,” he said.

The case marks the latest chapter in more than a decade of litigation surrounding religious exemptions from federal healthcare mandates. 

Advocates for religious liberty argue that these ongoing legal challenges threaten constitutional protections for faith-based organizations, highlighting tensions between government regulations and religious conscience, according to the Catholic News Agency.

With this ruling, the Little Sisters of the Poor face renewed legal challenges that could affect not only their employee healthcare policies but also the broader interpretation of religious exemptions nationwide. 

The case underscores the ongoing conflict between federal mandates and the constitutional rights of religious organizations, signaling that debates over the scope of such exemptions are far from resolved.

The post Obama-Appointed Judge Rules Against Little Sisters of the Poor in Long-Running Contraceptive Mandate Dispute appeared first on Resist the Mainstream.