Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Thomas
*2372 In these consolidated cases, we decide whether the Government created lawful exemptions from a regulatory requirement implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA), 124 Stat. 119 . The requirement at issue obligates *2373 certain employers to provide contraceptive coverage to their employees through their group health plans. Though contraceptive coverage is not required by (or even mentioned in) the ACA provision at issue, the Government mandated such coverage by promulgating interim final rules (IFRs) shortly after the ACA's passage. This requirement is known as the…
Also in this document: Concurrence; Concurring in the judgment; Dissent.
2Cases cited64 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Sherbert v. VernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Ore. v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by88 opinions
- Kravitz v. PurcellCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2023
- John Dierlam v. Donald Trump, PresidentCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2020
- Braidwood Management v. EEOCCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2023
- Michael Kitchen v. Gretchen WhitmerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2024
- DeOtte v. State of NVCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2021
83 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.