A federal judge in Texas ruled that the Affordable Care Act's mandate for free coverage of groundbreaking HIV prevention drugs made by Gilead Sciences Inc. "substantially burdens" the religious freedom of a Christian-owned company.
U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor in Fort Worth on Wednesday granted summary judgment to Braidwood Management Inc. in its challenge to coverage of Gilead's Truvada and Descovy. The two pre-exposure prophylactic drugs, commonly known as PrEP, are taken daily by hundreds of thousands of Americans, particularly men who have sex with men.
The suit is being led by attorney Jonathan Mitchell, the Republican former solicitor general of Texas known for his efforts to restrict abortion access in the state. Mitchell argues that mandatory PrEP coverage forces Christians to subsidize "homosexual behavior"
O'Connor, a George W. Bush appointee, said the government failed to demonstrate a state interest in providing coverage of the drugs that overcame the plaintiffs' religious objections.
"The government defendants in the suit "outline a generalized policy to combat the spread of HIV, but they provide no evidence connecting that policy to employers such as Braidwood," the judge wrote. "Thus, defendants have not carried their burden to show that the PrEP mandate furthers a compelling governmental interest."
The ruling is the latest win for conservatives who support a broad interpretation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a 1993 law that has been used to challenge access to abortion and contraception and to block equal protection for the LGBTQ community.
"This ruling is about imposing extreme religious beliefs — not, as it purports, about protecting religious freedom," said Ivy Hill, community health program director of the Campaign for Southern Equality. "Far-right extremist judges are attacking privacy and access to health care."
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
The judge reserved deciding the "appropriate remedy" for resolving the claim, and it's unclear what impact the ruling will have beyond the plaintiff company, which employs about 70 people. He said there was no evidence that the government couldn't assume the cost of providing PrEP drugs to people who are unable to obtain them from religious employers.
