Wheaton College v. Sebelius
403 U.S. App. D.C. 231
D.C. Cir.2012Background
- Interim Final Rule (July 2010) required group plans and issuers to cover preventive services for women under ACA, with later guidelines.
- August 1, 2011 guidelines require coverage of all FDA-approved contraceptives.
- Religious exemptions existed but appellants (religious colleges) were not exempt.
- District courts dismissed for standing and ripeness; standing proper at filing, but ripeness remains contested.
- February 2012 Final Rule maintained exemption for religious employers and created a safe harbor until first plan year beginning on/after Aug. 1, 2013; appellants’ plan years begin Jan 2014.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing and ripeness of the suits. | Appellants had standing when filed; ripeness questioned. | Government contests ripeness but acknowledges standing at filing. | Standing present; court addresses ripeness as part of abeyance decision. |
| Effect of government representations on justiciability. | Promises not to enforce current rule create uncertainty for plaintiffs. | Promises do not moot the claims; potential ERISA claims remain. | Cases held in abeyance pending new rule per government representations. |
| Whether to hold the cases in abeyance pending rulemaking. | Await ruling without immediate resolution; potential liability from employees. | Abeyance appropriate to await the government’s forthcoming rule. | Cases ordered in abeyance with periodic status reports. |
Key Cases Cited
- Chamber of Commerce v. EPA, 642 F.3d 192 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (standing assessed at time of filing)
- Am. Petroleum Inst. v. EPA, 683 F.3d 382 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (abeyance based on agency representations to court)
- Devia v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm’n, 492 F.3d 421 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (abeyance or defer further action pending rulemaking)
- EPA v. Brown, 431 U.S. 99 (Supreme Court 1977) (binding reliance on government representations)