Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.Anti-spam check. Do not fill this in! === Lower court history === In September 2012, Hobby Lobby filed a lawsuit in the [[United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma]] against enforcement of the contraception rule based on the RFRA and the [[Free Exercise Clause]] of the First Amendment. On November 19, 2012, U.S. District Judge [[Joe L. Heaton]] denied Hobby Lobby's request for a preliminary injunction.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10390225281706554853&hl=en&as_sdt=2006|title=Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius, 870 F. Supp. 2d 1278 - Dist. Court, WD Oklahoma 2012 - Google Scholar|access-date=2016-10-17|archive-date=2020-11-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201107053836/https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10390225281706554853&hl=en&as_sdt=2006|url-status=live}}</ref> On December 26, 2012, Justice [[Sonia Sotomayor]] issued an [[in-chambers opinion]] denying an injunction pending appeal.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1721474507433667393&hl=en&as_sdt=2006|title=Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius, 133 S. Ct. 641 - Supreme Court 2012 - Google Scholar|access-date=2016-10-17|archive-date=2017-04-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170423171936/https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1721474507433667393&hl=en&as_sdt=2006|url-status=live}}</ref> In March 2013, the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit]] granted a hearing of the case. In June, the appeals court ruled that Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. is a person who has [[religious freedom]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16964735894130305098&hl=en&as_sdt=2006|title=Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius, 723 F. 3d 1114 - Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit 2013 - Google Scholar|access-date=2016-10-17|archive-date=2021-02-14|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210214231909/https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16964735894130305098&hl=en&as_sdt=2006|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=Reach/> Circuit Judge [[Timothy Tymkovich]] wrote for the five-judge [[en banc]] majority, over a three-judge dissent.<ref>[http://cdn.harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/vol127_hobby_lobby_v_sebelius.pdf ''Recent Cases: Tenth Circuit Holds For-Profit Corporate Plaintiffs Likely to Succeed on the Merits of Substantial Burden on Religious Claim,''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151001132022/http://cdn.harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/vol127_hobby_lobby_v_sebelius.pdf |date=2015-10-01 }} 127 Harv. L. Rev. 1025 (2014).</ref> [[Neil Gorsuch]] voted with the majority and also wrote an opinion on the case.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-supreme-court-nominee-neil-gorsuch-notable-opinions-20170131-story.html|title=Hobby Lobby case among Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch's notable opinions|first=Tribune news|last=services|website=chicagotribune.com|access-date=2019-07-04|archive-date=2019-07-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190704192523/https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-supreme-court-nominee-neil-gorsuch-notable-opinions-20170131-story.html|url-status=live}}</ref> The court ordered the government to stop enforcement of the contraception rule on Hobby Lobby and sent the case back to the district court, which granted preliminary injunction in July. In September, the government appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.<ref>{{cite web|title=Case Timeline|url=http://www.hobbylobbycase.com/the-case/case-timeline/|work=hobbylobbycase.com|access-date=March 25, 2014|archive-date=March 26, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140326062651/http://www.hobbylobbycase.com/the-case/case-timeline/|url-status=live}}</ref> Two other federal appeals courts ruled against the [[Birth control|contraception]] coverage rule, while another two upheld it.<ref name=CNN/> The case was previously titled ''Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby''. [[Sylvia Mathews Burwell|Sylvia Burwell]] was automatically substituted as petitioner when she was approved by the [[United States Senate]] as [[United States Secretary of Health and Human Services|the Secretary of Health and Human Services]] after being nominated by [[President of the United States|President]] [[Barack Obama]] to replace [[Kathleen Sebelius]] following Sebelius' resignation on April 10, 2014. Summary: Please note that all contributions to Christianpedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Christianpedia:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission! Cancel Editing help (opens in new window) Discuss this page