Federal Court says accommodation contraceptive coverage for religious nonprofit probably viola RFRA costumes non-profit is being presented

A federal district court in Pennsylvania yesterday became the first to review on the merits of the accommodation provided for religious educational and charitable organizations nonprofit that object of the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate.  The Court, finding a probability of success on the merits in the RFRA challenge claimants of the final rules that were adopted in June, issued a preliminary injunc tion accelerated.  Zubik v. Sebelius, (WD PA, November 21, 2013), the Court said in part:[A] lthough the "accommodation" legally allows plaintiffs to avoid directly pay for the portion of the health plan that provides contraceptive products, services, and counseling, requires the "accommodation" shift the responsibility... toward a secular source. The Court concludes that the applicants have a sincerely belief that 'change of responsibility' not exempted or exonerate the of the moral turpitude created by the "accommodation"; on the contrary, it loads even substantially their religious beliefs carefully controlled...The application of these two regulations - an exemption and accommodation - has the effect of dividing the Catholic Church into two separate entities. Now, a regulation (the "exemption") is applied on the arm of the Catholic Church worship and therefore applies to all the employees that work within the walls of a church. While the other regulation ("accommodation") applies to the arms of "good works" of the Catholic Church and thus applies to those who stand in the church steps and distribute food and clothing to the needy... [B] and divide the Catholic Church in such a way, the Government has created a significant burden on the applicants right to freely exercise their religious beliefs.The Court went on to hold that the exemption for the same churches "is a recognition of the lack of a compelling governmental interest" at least in terms of some employers. Then he reasoned:If the Court to conclude that the Government has declared interests were sufficiently "convincing" to overcome the legitimate claims raised by the non profit, religious affiliated/associated with applicants, the net effect would be to allow the Government to join the Catholic Church into two parts: worship, service, and "good works", thereby entangling Government to decide what consists of "religion".Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, reports on the decision. [Thanks to Luke Goodrich to take the lead.]Meanwhile, another religious non-profit whose challenge originally posed problems of maturity (see prior publication) has filed a new lawsuit challenging the mandate of contraceptive coverage. The case is Belmont Abbey College v. Sebelius (D DC, filed 11/20/2013) (the full text of the complaint; Becket Fund news release).