O'Brien v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

766 F.3d 862, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 17297, 2014 WL 4401187
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided September 8, 2014·No. No. 12-3357·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In light of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S.-,-, 134 S.Ct. 2751, 2785, 189 L.Ed.2d 675 (2014), the appellants’ complaint submits a facially plausible claim for relief under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-l(a) to (e). See. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009). It thus appears unnecessary to address the appellants’ remaining claims, see Hobby Lobby, 573 U.S. at-, 134 S.Ct. at 2785, and the doctrine of constitutional avoidance particularly counsels us not to give unnecessary answers to constitutional questions, see, e.g., Ashwander v. TVA, 297 U.S. 288, 345-48, 56 S.Ct. 466, 80 L.Ed. 688 (1936) (Brandéis, J., concurring).

We reverse the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) dismissal of the appellants’ RFRA claim, vacate the dismissal of the appellants’ remaining claims without expressing any view on the merits, and remand for further proceedings consistent with Hobby Lobby.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

O'Brien v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 766 F.3d 862, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 17297, 2014 WL 4401187 (8th Cir. 2014).

766 F.3d 862 (O'Brien v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Knox v. Kijakazi
D. Minnesota, 2022
Craig v. Simon
D. Minnesota, 2020