Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/13pdf/13a1284_ap6c.pdf
Page Number: 14

14 

WHEATON COLLEGE v. BURWELL 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

tive  is  tasked  with  enforcing  Congress’  mandate  that 
preventative care be available to citizens at no cost beyond
that  of  insurance.    In  providing  the  accommodation  for
which  Wheaton  is  eligible,  the  Government  has  done  a 
salutary  thing:  exempt  religious  organizations  from  a 
requirement that might otherwise burden them.  Wheaton 
objects, however, to the minimally burdensome paperwork 
necessary  for  the  Government  to  administer  this  ac- 
commodation. 
If  the  Government  cannot  require  or- 
ganizations  to  attest  to  their  views  by  way  of  a  simple
self-certification  form  and  notify  their  third-party  admin-
istrators of their claimed exemption, how can it ever iden-
tify  the  organizations  eligible  for  the  accommodation  and 
perform  the  administrative  tasks  necessary  to  make  the 
accommodation  work?  The  self-certification  form  is  the 
least  intrusive  way  for  the  Government  to  administer  the
accommodation.  All that a religious organization must do
is  attest  to  the  views  that  it  holds  and  notify  its  third-
party  administrator  that  it  is  exempt.    The  Government 
rightly  accepts  that  attestation  at  face  value;  it  does  not 
question whether an organization’s views are sincere.  It is 
not at all clear to me how the Government could adminis-
ter  the  religious  nonprofit  accommodation  if  Wheaton 
were to prevail.

The  Court  has  different  ideas,  however.    Stepping  into
the shoes of HHS, the Court sets out to craft a new admin-
istrative regime.  Its order grants injunctive relief so long 
as Wheaton “informs the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services in writing that it is a non-profit organization that 
holds itself out as religious and has religious objections to 
providing  coverage  for  contraceptive  services.”    Supra,  at 
1.  And it goes further—“[t]o meet the condition for injunc-
tion pending appeal,” the Court continues, Wheaton “need 
not  use  the  [self-certification]  form  prescribed  by  the
Government . . . and need not send copies to health insur-
ance  issuers  or  third-party  administrators.”  Ibid.  This