Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/19-431_5i36.pdf
Page Number: 16.0

12 

LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR SAINTS PETER 
AND PAUL HOME v. PENNSYLVANIA 
Opinion of the Court 

IFRs.  See 83 Fed. Reg. 57542–57545, 57598–57603.  The 
final rule creating the religious exemption also contained a
lengthy analysis of the Departments’ changed position re-
garding  whether  the  self-certification  process  violated
RFRA.  Id.,  at  57544–57549.  And  the  Departments  ex-
plained  that,  in  the  wake  of  the  numerous  lawsuits  chal-
lenging the self-certification accommodation and the failed
attempt  to  identify  alternative  accommodations  after  the 
2016 request for information, “an expanded exemption ra-
ther than the existing accommodation is the most appropri-
ate administrative response to the substantial burden iden-
tified  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  Hobby  Lobby.” 
Id.,  at 
57544–57545. 

After the final rules were promulgated, the State of New 
Jersey joined Pennsylvania’s suit and, together, they filed
an amended complaint.  As relevant, the States—respond-
ents here—once again challenged the rules as substantively 
and procedurally invalid under the APA.  They alleged that 
the rules were substantively unlawful because the Depart-
ments lacked statutory authority under either the ACA or 
RFRA to promulgate the exemptions.  Respondents also as-
serted that the IFRs were not adequately justified by good 
cause, meaning that the Departments impermissibly used 
the IFR procedure to bypass the APA’s notice and comment
procedures.  Finally,  respondents  argued  that  the  pur-
ported procedural defects of the IFRs likewise infected the
final rules. 

The  District  Court  issued  a  nationwide  preliminary  in-
junction against the implementation of the final rules the 
same day the rules were scheduled to take effect.  The Fed-
eral  Government  appealed,  as  did  one  of  the  homes  oper-
ated by the Little Sisters, which had in the meantime inter-
vened in the suit to defend the religious exemption.5  The 

—————— 

5 The Little Sisters moved to intervene in the District Court to defend