Zubik Vs Burwll Case Summary

The Supreme Court case, Zubik v. Burwll is aimed to answer multiple questions. The first question this case aims to answer is does the availability of a regulatory exemption for religious employers regarding the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate eliminate the substantial burden on those organizations’ exercise of their religious freedom? The second question this case will answer is do the Department of Health and Human Services’ guidelines satisfy the Religious Freedom Restoration Act’s demanding test for overriding religious objections? Last, the third question this court will answer is do the Department of Health and Human Services’ guidelines violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act when the government has not proven that the guidelines
This mandate violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment of the population. Also, this violates the first amendment of the constitution that guarantees every United States citizen the freedom to practice his or her own religion. Lastly, the Affordable Care Act mandate violates the tenth amendment. The tenth amendment states that any powers not specifically named in the constitution belong to the states and the people, not the federal government. This mandate is a tremendous overreach of federal power, as the federal government has no right to enforce a mandate that violates religious freedom.
The precedents for this case involve various different rulings and laws. As mentioned, the first and fourteenth amendments state the Affordable Care Act mandate is a clear violation of the constitution. In the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby case, the court ruled that the act was not the least restrictive way possible. Also, Sherbert v. Verner established the definition of compelling state interest. The Affordable Care Act does not provide a compelling state interest for contraceptives to be mandated by the federal