45 C.F.R. § 92.2

Application

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this part, this part shall apply to:

(1) Every health program or activity, any part of which receives Federal financial assistance, directly or indirectly, from the Department;

(2) Every health program or activity administered by the Department; and

(3) Every health program or activity administered by a title I entity.

(b) The provisions of this part shall not apply to any employer or other plan sponsor of a group health plan, including but not limited to, a board of trustees (or similar body), association or other group, with regard to its employment practices, including the provision of employee health benefits.

(c) Any provision of this part held to be invalid or unenforceable by its terms, or as applied to any person or circumstance, shall be severable from this part and shall not affect the remainder thereof or the application of the provision to other persons not similarly situated or to other, dissimilar circumstances.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2016–2024 · leading case: Franciscan All., Inc. v. Burwell, 227 F. Supp. 3d 660 (N.D. Tex. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Franciscan All., Inc. v. Burwell, 227 F. Supp. 3d 660 (N.D. Tex. 2016). · cites it 6× “The Church Amendment is limited to specific federal funding streams, providing no assurance that the Rule’s enforcement mechanisms will not be employed to give “maximum effect to the provision[s] permitted by law.”

Whitman-Walker Clinic, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Servs. (D.D.C. 2020). · cites it 3× “at 37,244 (to be codified at 45 C.F.R. § 92.2 ). In another policy reversal, the 2020 Rule expressly incorporated Title IX’s religious exemption into Section 1557.”

North Dakota, State of v. Burwell (D.N.D. 2021). · cites it 2× “See 45 C.F.R. § 92.2 (b)(2). Still, HHS took the position that the “extension of sex-discrimination protections to encompass gender identity was contrary to the text of Title IX.”

Am. Coll. of Pediatricians v. Becerra (E.D. Tenn. 2022). · cites it 2× “at 31,466 (formerly codified at 45 C.F.R. § 92.2 ). In Franciscan Alliance, Inc.”

Boston All. of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual & Transgender Youth (BAGLY) v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs. (D. Mass. 2021). “at 31,466 (formerly codified at 45 C.F.R. § 92.2 (a)). It defines “covered entity” as “(1) [a]n entity that operates a health program or activity, any part of which received Federal financial assistance; (2) [a]n entity established under Title I of the ACA that administers a…”

Asapansa-Johnson Walker v. Azar II (E.D.N.Y 2020). “at 27,861 (to be codified at 45 C.F.R. § 92.2 ). Despite significant opposition, the agency finalized the proposal (“the 2020 Rules”) a year later.”

Franciscan All., Inc. v. Price (N.D. Tex. 2019). “62 (citing 45 C.F.R. § 92.2 (c)). Now, the Court VACATES only the portions of the Rule that are unlawful under the APA and RFRA.”

The State of Texas v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs. (W.D. Tex. 2024). “§ 18116 ; 45 C.F.R. § 92.2 2 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.”

— 45 C.F.R. § 92.2(a) — 1 case

Whitman-Walker Clinic, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Servs. (D.D.C. 2020). “at 37,244 (to be codified at 45 C.F.R. § 92.2 ). In another policy reversal, the 2020 Rule expressly incorporated Title IX’s religious exemption into Section 1557.”

— 45 C.F.R. § 92.2(b)(2) — 1 case

Franciscan All., Inc. v. Burwell, 227 F. Supp. 3d 660 (N.D. Tex. 2016). “The Church Amendment is limited to specific federal funding streams, providing no assurance that the Rule’s enforcement mechanisms will not be employed to give “maximum effect to the provision[s] permitted by law.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.