Justice back religious employers' challenge
Also reject copyright claim against Sheeran
By: Maureen Groppe
USA Today
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on June 16 [2025] helped religious employers who opposed New York's requirement that their health insurance cover medically necessary abortions.
.....
The court threw out a lower court's ruling that the regulation did not violate the rights of the employers to practice their religion. It directed New York;s top court to reconsider its decision in light of a related ruling the justices handed down earlier in June. [2025]
..... That prior case involved Wisconsin's denial of a tax exemption to the charitable arm of the Catholic church. the Supreme Court backed the charity, ruling that Wisconsin favored some religious denominations over others when deciding which employers don't have to pay the state's employment tax.
..... The Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany argued they and other groups challenging New York's law faced similar discrimination because the state's exemptions are too narrow. New York's mandate includes an exception for certain religious entities, such as those that seek to promote religious values and both employ and serve those who shear the religious tenets of the organization.
..... The state said that exception provides a "denominationally neutral" accommodation for houses of worship and similar organizations while protecting employees' need to access essential reproductive health care.
..... The policy was approved by state regulators in 2017 and codified into law by the legislature in 2022.
..... The religious employers who9 challenged the requirement said a nursing home run by Catholic nuns and a retirement community affiliated with the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany [NY] are among the employers who don't qualify for an exemption.
..... "No one would reasonably say a law is generally applicable if it exempts a religious nursing home that serves only Lutherans but not one that serves indigent elderly of all faiths," their lawyer told the Supreme Court.
..... This was the second time New York's rule came before the high court. In 2021, the majority directed the state courts to reconsider their decision in light of a ruling on a Catholic charity in Philadelphia hat declined to screen same-sex couples as foster parents.
.....
Although the Supreme Court's requested do-over is another win for the religious groups, they had urged the court not to go that route again but to immediately rule in their favor.
..... Still, lawyers for the challengers were pleased with the decision.
..... "We are confident that New York will finally get the message and stop discriminating against religious objectors," attorney Noel J. Francisco said in a statement.
.....
The Supreme Court also made some moves setting up its next term. the high court on June 16 [2025] agreed to get involved in New Jersey's attempt to investigate crisis pregnancy centers.
..... The court said it will decide whether First Choice women's Resource Centers can use the federal courts to try to block the state's attorney general form investigating whether the centers misled women into believing they offered abortions.
..... Attorney General Matthew Platkin is trying to get information from the centers about its practices, including details about its donors and internal communications. when First Choice went to federal court to prevent that, they were told they must first fight Platkin's subpoena in state court.
..... Lawyers for First Choice argue the centers are already being harmed because the state's investigation has hurt their ability to attract donations and advertise their services.
.....
Platkin told the Supreme Court there's no evidence of that. And, he said, the court shouldn't intervene now because the state is still negotiating with the centers on the information it wants. When that concludes, he said, the state courts will consider First Choice's claim hat the documents request violates its constitutional rights before signing off on a subpoena.
..... Lawyers for First Choice said state attorneys general are increasingly using their broad investigative powers - including to target political opponents - and federal intervention is needed. A number of conservative groups encouraged the supreme Court to Weigh in.
..... However, the high court will neither be getting it on more thinking out loud in its next term. The justices rejected a copyright challenge to Ed Sheeran's hit "thinking Out Loud" brought by a partial owner to the rights of Marvin Gaye;s 1973 classic "Let's Get It On."
.....
Lower courts found that the chord progression and harmonic rhythm in Gaye's song are too common to be legally protected. "And no reasonable jury could find hat the two songs, taken as whole, are substantially similar in light of their dissimilar melodies and lyrics," Judge Michael Park wrote for the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
..... In fact, in a separate lawsuit brought by the heirs of Ed Townsend, a co-writer of "Let's Get It On," a jury sided with Sheeran.
..... But Structured Asset Sales, which owns about 11% of the rights to Gaye's song, argued that the lower courts incorrectly dismissed the second lawsuit. The company said courts need to review actual recordings of Gaye's song, not just the sheet music on record with the Copyrights Office.
..... Because the appeals court said that wasn't allowed under the Copyright Act of 1909, their review was limited to just two musical elements, lawyers for Structured Assets sales argued.
..... "Thinking Out Loud" won Sheeran his first two Grammy Awards, song of the year and best pop solo performance, in 2016.
..... Contributing: Reuters