Britell v. United States

Maureen Britell (plaintiff) was married to a captain in the Air National Guard and was covered under the Civilian Health and Medical Program (CHAMPUS), her husband’s government-funded health insurance that covered uniformed service members’ dependents. When Britell was 20 weeks pregnant, she went for a routine checkup that revealed that the fetus suffered from anencephaly, a fetal abnormality that prevents a fetus from achieving consciousness and makes survival after birth highly unlikely. Britell and her husband decided to abort the fetus. Following the abortion, the abortion provider sought payment from Britell’s health insurer. CHAMPUS denied the claim on the grounds that it was statutorily prohibited from reimbursing abortions except if the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus was carried to term. The abortion provider sued Britell for the cost of the abortion. The parties settled. Britell, in turn, filed suit against the United States (defendant) alleging that the statute prohibiting CHAMPUS from reimbursing abortion expenses was unconstitutional as applied to abortions performed when the fetus suffered from a lethal fetal abnormality such as anencephaly. The district court sided with Britell, ruling that the denial of funding violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution because a ban on funding abortions in cases of anencephaly was not rationally related to the state’s interest in protecting potential human life. The US appealed, maintaining that the protection and promotion of potential human life and the drawing of a bright line that no birth defects may be federally funded were legitimate government interests.