Church gets another chance to challenge WA abortion coverage law
For more than six years, the
The church lost another round in its case in March, with a federal appeals panel issuing a 2-1 ruling that upheld a lower court decision siding with the state.
But on Tuesday, there was a new twist when the
The withdrawal comes after the
In a short, written order, the three-judge appeals court panel provided no explanation for taking back the March decision. The judges wrote that oral arguments would be rescheduled and they would issue another opinion "in due course."
The judges were appointed by Presidents
One of the church's attorneys said in a statement that "when an appellate panel vacates a decision and orders re-argument in response to a petition for rehearing en banc, that's presumably because two or more of the panel members now believe that the original decision contained errors."
"The
The case concerns a 2018 state law mandating employer insurance plans provide contraceptive and abortion coverage, if they cover maternity care. Democratic lawmakers passed the legislation, known as the Reproductive Parity Act, over concerns from religious groups that it would violate their constitutional rights.
The case has been moving through the courts ever since.
The state clarified that, under the new law, employees could get coverage for abortion services through their employer's insurance carrier, but their plan didn't have to include it. In line with that regulation,
The now-withdrawn majority opinion from the appeals court said, "Insurers could offer no-abortion health plans to employers both before and after passage of the Parity Act."
"Invalidation of the Parity Act — the relief that Plaintiff seeks — thus could not and would not force any insurer to offer a no-abortion plan to Plaintiff," it added.
At the time, an attorney for the church called the majority ruling "shocking," and suggested he would take the case to the
A spokesperson for the state attorney general's office said Wednesday "there is no way to tell for certain beyond what is stated in the order," why the appeals judges withdrew their opinion, but agreed it could be in response to the church's request for a new hearing.
"Sometimes when that happens, the panel of the Ninth Circuit that decided the case will withdraw the original opinion to address something raised in the petition for rehearing," spokesperson
"We remain confident the plaintiff lacks standing to bring this case and that


Reaction: SEC to Launch "Project Crypto"
AM Best Assigns Preliminary Credit Assessment to Sabal Specialty Insurance Company, Inc.
Advisor News
- Your client’s $3 million portfolio doesn’t tell you their insurance needs
- How life insurance can provide liquidity for wealthy families
- Retirement providers turn to digital engagement to retain assets
- Looking out for clients with diminished mental capacity
- House panel advances CLEAR Forms Act backed by IRI
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- AM Best to Deliver Presentation at 2026 ACLI Annual Conference
- Global Atlantic Announces Launch of ForeLifetime Income, a New Fixed Index Annuity
- A-Cap strikes back with lawsuit accusing SC regulators of sloppy process, leaking secrets
- AM Best to Discuss Its Views on Private Credit Surge and Risks at 2026 NAIC/NIPR Insurance Summit
- OID recovers $260M in life insurance benefits
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News