Cedar Park Assembly of God v. Myron Kreidler, 20-35507

Cedar Park Assembly of God (religious employer in Washington) sued after SB 6219 was enacted and its insurer, Kaiser Permanente, stopped offering a health plan that restricted abortion coverage. Cedar Park could not obtain comparable replacement coverage.
District court dismissed Cedar Park’s complaint for lack of standing; Cedar Park appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
Cedar Park alleged injury-in-fact (loss of desired restricted plan) fairly traceable to SB 6219 and sought an injunction to restore its ability to obtain such plans.
The State argued there was no injury because SB 6219 did not bar insurers from offering restricted plans, other insurers offered acceptable plans, and Kaiser had previously erred in issuing a policy covering abortion.
Cedar Park also pleaded an equal protection claim based on SB 6219’s interaction with Washington’s conscience-objection statute; the court addressed standing for that claim. Cedar Park forfeited any separate Establishment Clause standing argument.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Standing: injury-in-fact, traceability, redressability	Kaiser removed Cedar Park’s abortion-coverage restrictions because of SB 6219, causing a concrete injury; injunction would let Cedar Park obtain a similar plan	SB 6219 did not prevent insurers from offering restricted plans; other insurers provided acceptable plans; Kaiser’s prior issuance of a covering policy was an error	Reversed in part: complaint plausibly alleged injury fairly traceable to SB 6219 and redressable; prior Kaiser error irrelevant to standing
Standing to pursue Equal Protection claim	SB 6219 interacting with the conscience-objection statute treats Cedar Park differently, denying equal treatment	Religious organizations that buy coverage are not similarly situated to providers who deliver health services	Affirmed in part: Cedar Park failed to plausibly allege an injury-in-fact for equal protection; providers not similarly situated; claim dismissed

Southcentral Foundation v. Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, 983 F.3d 411 (9th Cir. 2020) (review standard and standing principles)
Skyline Wesleyan Church v. Cal. Dep’t of Managed Health Care, 968 F.3d 738 (9th Cir. 2020) (evidence that a plaintiff previously obtained a plan supports redressability)
Scott v. Pasadena Unified Sch. Dist., 306 F.3d 646 (9th Cir. 2002) (equal protection standing and similarly situated analysis)
City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432 (1985) (framework for determining whether parties are similarly situated for equal protection)
Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045 (9th Cir. 1999) (forfeiture doctrine for arguments omitted from opening brief)