Oakland Judge Issues Second Injunction Blocking Changes to Contraceptive Coverage
U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam's ruling comes less than a week after a judge in Philadelphia issued a similar injunction.
December 21, 2017 at 02:33 PM
3 minute read
U.S. District Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Northern District of California. Photo: Jason Doiy/ALM
U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam of the Northern District of California has issued a preliminary injunction barring the Trump administration's rule changes allowing some employers to opt out of providing contraceptive coverage under the Affordable Care Act.
Gilliam found the process leading to the changes violated the Administrative Procedure Act, a ruling that mirrored findings by U.S. District Judge Wendy Beetlestone of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, who ruled against the administration in a similar case last week.
In October, the Trump administration issued rule changes expanding the scope of the exemption for religious organizations under the Affordable Care Act's contraceptive coverage mandate, and created a new exemption based on “moral objections.”
The states of California, Delaware, Maryland, New York and Virginia sued in the Northern District of California, and sought an injunction barring the rule changes in early November. The states argued the administration's moves would put scores of women at risk of losing their no-cost contraceptive coverage under the ACA. The states also argued the rule changes violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires a notice-and-comment period prior to most federal rulemaking.
In Thursday's ruling, Gilliam acknowledged early the federal government's lawyers' contention that this is a case “about religious liberty and freedom of conscience.” But, he wrote that the federal agencies' action amounted to “a reversal of their approach to striking the proper balance between substantial governmental and societal interests.”
Gilliam ruled that the states had shown they “face potentially dire public health and fiscal consequences as a result of a process as to which they had no input.”
In a statement, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, whose office has been leading the litigation before Gilliam, said that “a woman, not her boss and certainly not a politician, should decide what's best for her own healthcare.”
Said Becerra: “In concert with last week's injunction in Pennsylvania, today's ruling amounts to a one-two punch against the Trump Administration's unlawful overreach.”
Gilliam's full ruling is posted below:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJustices Seek Solicitor General's Views on Music Industry's Copyright Case Against ISP
Judge to Hear Arguments on Whether Google's Advertising Tech Constitutes a Monopoly
3 minute readSEC Targets Rising Crypto Financier in $115 Million Securities Fraud
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Stock Trading App Robinhood Hit With Privacy Class Action 1 Month After Alleged Data Breach
- 2NY High Court Returns Fired Priest's Discrimination Claim to State Agency
- 3Digging Deep to Mitigate Risk in Lithium Mine Venture Wins GM Legal Department of the Year Award
- 4Reminder: Court Rules and Statutes Apply to Pendente Lite Custody Decisions
- 5Consumer Cleared to Proceed With Claims Against CVS 'Non-Drowsy' Medication, Judge Says
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250