Quantcast
Connect with us

Supreme Court will hear Hobby Lobby birth control case on Tuesday

Published

on

Can a company deliberately exclude health insurance coverage of the morning after pill for its employees, in the name of freedom of religion?

That’s a question the US Supreme Court could take up on Tuesday when it decides whether to hear a case pitting a chain of craft stores against President Barack Obama’s signature health care law.

The Obama administration is challenging the refusal of Hobby Lobby Stores to underwrite coverage for certain contraceptive methods.

ADVERTISEMENT

The family-owned chain based in Oklahoma says it manages its business “in a manner consistent with biblical principles.”

“We believe that it is by God’s grace and provision that Hobby Lobby has endured. He has been faithful in the past, and we trust Him for our future,” it says on its website.

Joined by the religious bookstore Mardel, Hobby Lobby has refused to abide by the new health care law’s requirement that it provide health insurance coverage for four methods of contraception (two abortive pills and two types of IUDs), or pay a fine.

The chain has not challenged other methods agreed to by the federal government — contraceptive pills, diaphragms and other barrier methods — but it objects to the four specific methods on grounds they are comparable to abortion.

In a brief filed with the court, the company argued that “by providing insurance coverage for contraceptives that could prevent a human embryo from implanting in the uterus, they themselves would be morally complicit in ‘the death of [an] embryo.’?

ADVERTISEMENT

A federal appeals court agreed, ruling that the legal requirement was counter to the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

The Obama health care law exempted churches and other religious organizations from having to provide coverage for birth control.

But the government argued that “no court has ever found a for-profit company to be a religious organization for purposes of federal law.

ADVERTISEMENT

The court of appeals erred by deeming the respondent corporations to be ‘persons’ engaged in the ‘exercise of religions’ within the meaning of RFRA,” Solicitor General Donald Verrilli contended.

If the top US court takes up the case, it will be its first major decision on Obama’s health care law since it upheld the reform’s constitutionality in June 2012.

ADVERTISEMENT

It would also force the court to review its controversial 2010 “Citizens United v FEC” decision, which concluded that companies have a right to freedom of expression under the First Amendment of the Constitution.

That decision allowed companies to provide candidates with unlimited campaign financing.

The Supreme Court would have to decide whether that decision also meant a company has a right to religious freedom.

ADVERTISEMENT

[Image via Agence France-Presse]


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Latest Headlines

Adoption offers pour in for grouchy feline famously dubbed ‘world’s worst cat’

Published

on

Continue Reading

Facebook

Washington Post reporter suspended after tweeting article about Kobe Bryant rape allegation

Published

on

On Sunday, Kobe Bryant — basketball icon, Philadelphia native, fluent Italian speaker and retired member of the Los Angeles Lakers — was killed in a helicopter crash in his adopted home of Southern California along with his 13-year-old daughter Gianna and seven others. Washington Post reporter Felicia Sonmez, following Bryant’s death, tweeted a link to a Daily Beast article discussing Bryant’s 2003 rape case. And the Post has suspended Sonmez, according to Managing Editor Tracy Grant.

Continue Reading
 

Latest Headlines

Bio-methane from cow manure could be a ‘new gold rush’ on the farm

Published

on

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image