SCOTUS apparently rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

[Adam]

Embedded Tweet

The opinion hasn't been released yet, but this sounds like a big win for Hobby Lobby and a big blow to Obamafail.

[Adam]

Supreme Court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby in contraceptive case

The Supreme Court dealt a setback to President Obama's health care law Monday and ruled that Christian business owners with religious objections to certain forms of birth control may refuse to provide their employees with insurance coverage for contraceptives.

In a major 5-4 ruling on religious freedom, the justices decided the religious rights of these company owners trump the rights of female employees to receive the full contraceptive coverage promised by the law.

The decision, written by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., is a victory for social conservatives. It also could open the door for other businesses to claim a religious exemption from laws, including anti-discrimination measures that protects gays and lesbians.

The administration's lawyers had argued that a private, for-profit corporation, like the Hobby Lobby chain of arts and crafts stores, had never before been accorded rights based on religion.

But the court determined that the Green family from Oklahoma City which founded the chain, has a sincere religious belief that certain contraceptives destroy a fertilized egg and, therefore, are akin to an early abortion.

In the case, two family-owned companies, Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties, challenged the insurance requirement for certain employee birth control devices and methods as a violation of a 1993 religious-freedom law. The Oklahoma based arts-and-crafts retailer Hobby Lobby is controlled by evangelical Christians, and the Pennsylvania-based cabinet-manufacturer Conestoga Wood Specialties is owned by Mennonites. The healthcare law already exempts churches and religious-run entities from the contraceptive mandate.

So, it's a narrow ruling, rather than a broad-sweeping one, but I suspect that this will be used quite a bit now to stop forcing bakeries out of business because they don't want to bake a cake for a gay wedding.

[Adam]

The opinion.

[Adam]

So, it's a narrow ruling, rather than a broad-sweeping one, but I suspect that this will be used quite a bit now to stop forcing bakeries out of business because they don't want to bake a cake for a gay wedding.

It's a narrow ruling, but it looks like they did indeed leave the door wide open for the bolded:

RFRA’s text shows that Congress designed the statute toprovide very broad protection for religious liberty and did not intend to put merchants to such a choice. It employed the familiar legal fiction of including corporations within RFRA’s definition of “persons,”but the purpose of extending rights to corporations is to protect the rights of people associated with the corporation, including shareholders, officers, and employees. Protecting the free-exercise rights of closely held corporations thus protects the religious liberty of the humans who own and control them.

[Novaheart]

So, it's a narrow ruling, rather than a broad-sweeping one, but I suspect that this will be used quite a bit now to stop forcing bakeries out of business because they don't want to bake a cake for a gay wedding.

Naturally, amidst all the noise at MSNBC I can't find anything which clarifies this ruling. Does this mean that the employees of hobby lobby won't get "free" contraception and that it will be covered as any other drug (with co-pay) or that it won't be covered at all?

[Novaheart]

It's a narrow ruling, but it looks like they did indeed leave the door wide open for the bolded:

I doubt it. The justification for trampling freedom of association with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 doesn't translate to birth control.

[Adam]

Naturally, amidst all the noise at MSNBC I can't find anything which clarifies this ruling. Does this mean that the employees of hobby lobby won't get "free" contraception and that it will be covered as any other drug (with co-pay) or that it won't be covered at all?

It probably means that at least the contraception portion of Obamafail has to be re-legislated if that part is to stay in. Virtually NO employer is mandated to provide any medication that violates their established religious beliefs.

What was ultimately upheld here was the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Hobby Lobby already provides multiple forms of oral contraception (16, last I heard) in their health plan, which long pre-dates Obamafail. They objected to four drugs in the formulary that they consider to be abortificants. They do cover these four drugs for medically necessary reasons (regulate menstruation, etc.), but they do not cover them for the sole purpose of birth control.


Ironically, Obama probably could have avoided this if he had just done another one of his illegal pen-stroke exemptions. Instead, his signature legislation is at risk.

[Norm dePlume]

Well, this should be a real boon to the faith healing churches that don't believe in surgery. If you own a closely held corporation and join the Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, now you won't have to cover your employees' blood transfusions.

[Adam]

Well, this should be a real boon to the faith healing churches that don't believe in surgery. If you own a closely held corporation and join the Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, now you won't have to cover your employees' blood transfusions.

Then maybe it's just a bad fucking idea to have the government controlling healthcare in the first place.



Crazy-talk, I know, but we managed to get on just fine for about 225 years without the feds declaring that they were taking over our healthcare, and it's not like you weren't warned that this was going to happen back then. I remember specifically pointing this problem out on NU back before Nancy carried her ridiculous gavel up the courthouse steps and thousands of protesters didn't chant "nigger" at anyone.

Or, as succinctly pointed out just a few minutes ago:

Embedded Tweet

[Gingersnap]

Last I heard, employment was a free association contract. I would not personally work for a closely-held JW company because my understanding of scripture and theirs is completely at odds. Neither would I work for a similar Muslim company - I have no interest in "supporting" Islam by what I wear or eat at work.

Since Hobby Lobby covers a bunch of other contraceptives, this seems like a personal issue the tiny fraction of employees that have to have one of the 4 particular products.

I have to screw around with food to avoid some medical consequences at this point. I don't think my former employer should have had to subsidize my particular issue.

People eat a lot more often than they screw.

[Adam]

Last I heard, employment was a free association contract. I would not personally work for a closely-held JW company because my understanding of scripture and theirs is completely at odds. Neither would I work for a similar Muslim company - I have no interest in "supporting" Islam by what I wear or eat at work.

Since Hobby Lobby covers a bunch of other contraceptives, this seems like a personal issue the tiny fraction of employees that have to have one of the 4 particular products.

I have to screw around with food to avoid some medical consequences at this point. I don't think my former employer should have had to subsidize my particular issue.

People eat a lot more often than they screw.

Actually, to the best of my knowledge, not one single Hobby Lobby employee has raised a complaint about this.

[Billy Jingo]

People eat a lot more often than they screw.

Speak for yourself.

[Billy Jingo]

Well, this should be a real boon to the faith healing churches that don't believe in surgery. If you own a closely held corporation and join the Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, now you won't have to cover your employees' blood transfusions.

I wouldn't worry about it too much. Scalia isn't a Jehovah's Witness so it's not a real religion.

[Norm dePlume]

I think the forward thinking thing to do now is to found a new religion whose precepts prohibit keeping detailed financial records. Should be very popular.

[Adam]

I think the forward thinking thing to do now is to found a new religion whose precepts prohibit keeping detailed financial records. Should be very popular.

We already have one of those. It's called "The IRS."