Thread: U.S. top court throws out Obamacare contraception ruling

U.S. top court throws out Obamacare contraception ruling

By Lawrence Hurley 1 hour ago

Related Stories

1. Are religious accommodations an American tradition worth preserving?Christian Science Monitor
2. Gay Rights, Religious Freedom and the Law The Wall Street Journal
3. Kuwait top court orders bail for opposition leader AFP
4. Supreme Court rejects Rajat Gupta's insider trading appeal Reuters
5. Supreme Court Sends Redistricting Ruling Back To North Carolina Huffington Post

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday revived religious objections by Catholic groups in Michigan and Tennessee to the Obamacare requirement for contraception coverage, throwing out a lower court decision favoring President Barack Obama's administration.

The justices asked the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its decision that backed the Obama administration in light of the Supreme Court's June 2014 ruling that allowed certain privately owned corporations to seek exemptions from the provision.

Obama's healthcare law, known as Obamacare, requires employers to provide health insurance policies that cover preventive services for women including access to contraception and sterilization.

Various challengers, including family-owned companies and religious affiliated nonprofits that oppose abortion and sometimes the use of contraceptives, say the requirement infringes on their religious beliefs.

The high court threw out a June 2014 appeals court ruling that went in favor of the government. In March, the court took a similar approach in a case concerning the University of Notre Dame.

The appeals court rulings in both cases pre-dated the Supreme Court's June 2014 ruling that family-owned Hobby Lobby Stores Ltd could seek exemptions on religious grounds from the contraception provision of the 2010 healthcare law.

Courts that have ruled on the issue since the Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision have all decided in favor of the government, finding the government's compromise does not impose a substantial burden on the plaintiffs' religious beliefs. Religious rights are protected under a law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The case is Michigan Catholic Conference v. Burwell, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 14-701.

http://news.yahoo.com/u-top-court-th...141350982.html

I have serious reservations about permitting organizations to choose which parts of a law they will obey. If there must be an opt out, IMO it should be one which permits them to choose not to receive any benefit at all from the law, part of which they object to. So, for example, if contraception is not something which they can abide, then they should have the option to opt out of Obamacare. So no benefits at all to their clients - students or not - from that law.
************************************
Americans first in this magnificent country

American jobs for American workers

Fair trade, not free trade

Originally Posted by vistalad

I have serious reservations about permitting organizations to choose which parts of a law they will obey. If there must be an opt out, IMO it should be one which permits them to choose not to receive any benefit at all from the law, part of which they object to. So, for example, if contraception is not something which they can abide, then they should have the option to opt out of Obamacare. So no benefits at all to their clients - students or not - from that law.
************************************
Americans first in this magnificent country

American jobs for American workers

Fair trade, not free trade

I totally agree with you! I am totally opposed to Obama Care. A government forcing mandated health insurance upon anyone is not a viable strategy in a free nation of free citizens to solve an economic problem that was created by the government in first place by its massive immigration and free trade treason policies that infested our country with more poor people than our health care system could afford and drove the good jobs and employers who provided some of the best health insurance in the world out of the country through a massive free trade treason initiative.

However, I also totally agree with you, that both companies and organizations who object to one part of the law should be able to opt out of this program on an all or nothing basis.