By Gregory M. Lipper Over at Rewire, I’ve analyzed yesterday’s oral argument in Zubik v. Burwell. Among other things, I address the recurring claim that the government was “hijacking” religious objectors’ health plans by arranging for third party insurers and plan administrators to provide contraceptive coverage to affected women: The fear of hijacking might have made…
By Michael Anne Kyle Of the 4,926 community hospitals in the United States, the majority, about 58 percent (2,870) are not-for-profit. About 21 percent (1,053) are for-profit, and the remainder are owned by state and local governments. Hospitals serve communities by caring for the sick, but they’re also often billion dollar enterprises and tension between…
By Gregory M. Lipper (Read Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5 of this series) The plaintiffs in Zubik v. Burwell and its siblings seek to block their students and employees from receiving contraceptive coverage from third-party insurance companies and plan administrators. Even though the plaintiffs need neither provide nor pay…
By Gregory M. Lipper (Read Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 6 of this series) Despite birth control’s considerable benefits, the challengers in Zubik v. Burwell argue that the government lacks a compelling interest in applying the contraceptive accommodation to religious objectors. No matter how important it is to ensure that women have access…
By Gregory M. Lipper (Read Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 5, and Part 6 of this series.) If the Supreme Court were to conclude that the plantiffs in Zubik v. Burwell plaintiffs have established a substantial burden on religious exercise, the case is not over. Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the government may enforce…
By Gregory M. Lipper (Read Part 1, Part 2, Part 4, Part 5, and Part 6 of this series) Pay attention to the Supreme Court’s upcoming contraceptive-coverage cases and you’ll hear horror stories from religious-right groups about an “abortion-pill mandate” (here’s ADF and ACLJ). These groups know that contraception is popular and that, to most people, campaigns to block…
By Gregory M. Lipper (Read Part 1, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, and Part 6 of this series) Yesterday, I evaluated the unprecedented arguments, by the plaintiffs in Zubik v. Burwell and its companion cases, that the process for seeking a religious exemption from the contraceptive-coverage regulations itself burdened the objectors’ religious exericse. Today, I move to…
This new post by Kristin Madison appears on the Health Affairs Blog concludes the blog series stemming from the Fourth Annual Health Law Year in P/Review event held at Harvard Law School on Friday, January 29, 2016. Wellness programs remain a popular feature of the employer landscape, but the legal environment surrounding them has long been uncertain. In April 2015, the Equal Employment…
By Gregory M. Lipper (Read Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, and Part 6 of this series) Birth control is back at the high court. On March 23, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Zubik v. Burwell and its six companion cases. Despite what you may have heard, religious objectors—whether they are nuns…
By Cornelia Hall This is the third entry in a three-part series on the AcademyHealth National Health Policy Conference, held in Washington, DC, on February 1-2. Read the first entry here and the second entry here. The national debt as a percentage of GDP has spiked in the last several years, rising from approximately 35%…
