Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. v. Sebelius

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• providing that the government “must show that requiring [appellants] to provide the contraceptives to which they object ... will further the government’s compelling interests in promoting public health and in providing women equal access to health care”
• providing that the government “must show that requiring [appellants] to provide the contraceptives to which they object … will further the government‟s compelling interests in promoting public health and in providing women equal access to health care”
• granting preliminary injunction to publishing corporation and its president because they had “shown a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their RFRA claim,” and because the other preliminary injunction factors favored granting the motion
• applying a sliding scale standard by which, “[i]f the movant makes an unusually strong showing on one of the factors, then it does not necessarily have to make as strong a showing on another factor” (alteration in original) (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “[T]here is undoubtedly also a public interest in ensuring that the rights secured under the First Amendment and, by extension, the RFRA, are protected.”
• for-profit publisher of Christian texts, owned by not-for-profit religious foundation and related trusts which directed publisher’s profits to religious charity and educational work

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).