More on what the Wheaton College injunction does (and does not) mean for contraception coverage

…..In her Wheaton College dissent, Justice Sotomayor accuses the majority of disregarding its own four-day-old precedent in granting an injunction against enforcement of the contraception mandate: “After expressly relying on the availability of the religious-nonprofit accommodation to hold that the contraceptive coverage requirement violates RFRA as applied to closely held for-profit corporations, the Court now … retreats from that position.” In so doing, Justice Sotomayor wrote, the Court’s majority “evinces disregard for even the newest of the Court’s precedents and undermines confidence in this institution.” Indeed, she suggested, the Court had been dishonest: “Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe they can take us at our word. not so today.”