The Alliance urges the Supreme Court to intervene in Breanna Renteria v. New Mexico Office of the Superintendent of Insurance
WASHINGTON — The Alliance of Health Care Sharing Ministries (Alliance) has asked the Supreme Court of the United States to take up a case that could reshape protections for religious freedom in America.
At issue is whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit ignored and attempted to rewrite the long-standing precedent on religious liberty in Breanna Renteria, et al. v. New Mexico Office of the Superintendent of Insurance, et al. (No. 23-2123). The Alliance filed an amicus curiae brief to support the plaintiff’s request for a review by the high court.
The case arose when New Mexico officials ordered Gospel Light Mennonite Church Medical Aid Plan, a Health Care Sharing Ministry (HCSM), to cease operations in the state, claiming it was acting as an unlicensed insurer. Petitioners sought a preliminary injunction, arguing the order violated their religious freedom and federal protections under the Affordable Care Act, which recognizes HCSMs as different entities from health insurers. Both the district court and the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals denied the injunction, prompting petitioners to seek Supreme Court review.
“The 10th Circuit’s ruling represents a dangerous shift away from the Supreme Court’s clear precedents protecting religious liberty,” said Katy Talento, executive director of the Alliance of Health Care Sharing Ministries. “By inventing a ‘primary purpose’ test, the appeals panel has created an arbitrary standard that punishes people of faith for practicing their religious beliefs while allowing secular organizations to operate freely.”
Talento adds the implications reach far beyond the petitioners: “If left uncorrected, this decision could open the door for regulators to treat religious groups as second-class citizens, applying stricter rules simply because their work is rooted in faith. The Supreme Court must intervene to restore the constitutional balance.”
At the dispute’s center is the Supreme Court’s 1990 decision in Employment Division v. Smith. That ruling, reaffirmed and clarified in later cases such as Tandon v. Newsom (2021), held that laws must be generally applicable and may not favor secular activities over religious ones when both present similar risks to the government’s stated interests.
The Alliance’s brief warns that the 10th Circuit “departed from this Court as well as every other circuit” by comparing religious and secular organizations’ purposes rather than the risks their activities posed. Judge Joel Carson, in dissent, said no other court had recognized such a “novel distinction” and accused the majority of misinterpreting Tandon. The organization asserts that this approach threatens to erode constitutional protections for religious communities.
Health Care Sharing Ministries are faith-based, nonprofit organizations in which members share one another’s medical expenses in accordance with shared religious beliefs. Recognized under the Affordable Care Act, HCSMs today serve more than 1.5 million Americans across all 50 states, collectively sharing billions of dollars in medical expenses annually.
The Alliance notes that most states — 34 of them in fact — provide legal protections that allow HCSMs to operate freely with no significant risk of inaccurate accusations of being unlicensed insurance. But in New Mexico and a handful of other states, regulators have attempted to classify ministries as insurers — even when comparable secular organizations, such as labor unions or fraternal benefit societies, receive exemptions.
The brief filed by the Alliance emphasizes that the Supreme Court’s Tandon standard provides clarity, holding governments accountable to neutral, generally applicable rules. Without intervention, the Alliance warns, states may continue to craft regulations that single out ministries for unfavorable treatment under the guise of technical distinctions.
The organization further argues that the case offers the Court an opportunity not only to enforce its Tandon precedent but also to reconsider the troubled legacy of Smith, which has left lower courts struggling to apply consistent standards. “Tandon treated the symptoms, not the underlying ailment,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in a prior concurrence in Fulton v. Philadelphia (2021). The Alliance contends this case presents “a viable vehicle” for the Court to revisit or overrule Smith entirely.
For now, the organization urges the Court to grant certiorari and halt what it calls an alarming attempt by the 10th Circuit to “fine-tune” legal standards against people of faith.
“This is not just about one ministry in New Mexico,” Talento said. “It is about the right of millions of Americans to live out their faith in community without government interference.”
Founded in 2007 and headquartered in Washington, D.C., the Alliance of Health Care Sharing Ministries is a 501(c)(6) trade organization representing the common interests of Health Care Sharing Ministries, which facilitate the sharing of health care needs — financial, emotional, and spiritual — by individuals and families. AHCSM engages with federal and state regulators, members of the media, and the Christian community to provide accurate and timely information on health care sharing.
To learn more about the Alliance of Health Care Sharing Ministries, visit www.ahcsm.org or follow the ministry on Facebook or Twitter.
###
To interview a representative from the Alliance of Health Care Sharing Ministries, contact Media@HamiltonStrategies.com, Beth Bogucki, 610.584.1096, ext. 105, Dawn Foglein, ext. 100, or Richard Jefferson, rjefferson@hamiltonstrategies.com.