## Facts

- The Affordable Care Act required coverage of specified preventive services, including FDA-approved contraceptive methods, without cost sharing.
- The University of Notre Dame, a Catholic university, objected on religious grounds to contraceptive coverage in its employee and student health plans.
- Federal regulations provided an accommodation for eligible religious nonprofits: the organization could opt out by submitting a self-certification to its insurer/third-party administrator or notifying HHS of its objection.
- After an objection was made under the accommodation, federal law required the insurer or third-party administrator to provide separate contraceptive coverage to participants without cost to the objecting organization.
- Notre Dame asserted that submitting the form or notice made it morally complicit because the notice would result in contraceptive coverage being provided through arrangements connected to its plans.
- Notre Dame sued federal officials and sought a preliminary injunction to bar enforcement of the accommodation as applied to it.
- The district court denied the preliminary injunction, and Notre Dame appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether requiring a religious nonprofit to submit a form or notice to invoke the ACA contraceptive accommodation substantially burdens the nonprofit’s exercise of religion under RFRA.
2. Whether Notre Dame satisfied the requirements for a preliminary injunction, including likelihood of success on the merits.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction.
- The court held that, on the record presented, the accommodation did not impose a substantial burden on Notre Dame’s religious exercise under RFRA.
- The court concluded Notre Dame did not show a likelihood of success on the merits and therefore failed to justify preliminary injunctive relief.

## Legal Principles

- Under RFRA, the government may not substantially burden religious exercise unless it proves the application of the burden furthers a compelling interest and is the least restrictive means.
- A preliminary injunction requires, at minimum, a showing of likelihood of success on the merits, along with irreparable harm, appropriate balance of harms, and consistency with the public interest.
- A notification requirement that functions as a condition of exemption, where federal law independently imposes obligations on third parties to provide coverage and the objector does not fund or administer that coverage, does not necessarily constitute a substantial burden under RFRA.
- A claimant’s sincere religious belief is respected, but the legal question of what conduct the law requires and what consequences the law assigns is distinct from the claimant’s theological view of complicity.

## Conclusion

The Seventh Circuit held that the ACA’s accommodation allowed Notre Dame to opt out of providing contraceptive coverage and that federal law—not Notre Dame’s notice—placed any resulting coverage duty on insurers or third-party administrators; because the accommodation imposed no substantial burden under RFRA, the court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction.


Univ. of Notre Dame v. Burwell, 786 F.3d 606 (7th Cir. 2015)