Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Federal Judge Calls Obamacare "Totally Ineffective" While Striking Down Contraception Mandate
Townhall.com ^ | December 17, 2013 | Conn Carroll

Posted on 12/17/2013 2:46:47 PM PST by jazusamo

Yesterday, Judge Brian Cogan of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, not only struck down

Obamacare's contraception mandate as applied to religious non-profit organizations, but also sent a strong signal that federal courts were losing patience with President Obama's many stitches of executive power.

Previous courts had ruled against President Obama's contraception mandate as applied to for-profit entities (see Sebelius v Hobby Lobby), but this was the first court to hold that participating in Obama's scheme to provide free birth control is a substantial burden on the free practice of religion (specifically the Catholic Archdiocese of New York and its affiliate organizations).

The contraception mandate "directly compels plaintiffs, through the threat of onerous penalties, to undertake actions that their religion forbids," Cogan wrote. "There is no way that a court can, or should, determine that a coerced violation of conscience is of insufficient quantum to merit constitutional protection."

Cogan forcefully rejected three key Obama defenses of the mandate. First, on the government's claim that there was a compelling interest in uniform enforcement of the contraception mandate, Cogan wrote:

Tens of millions of people are exempt from the Mandate, under exemptions for grandfathered health plans, small businesses, and “religious employers” like the Diocesan plaintiffs here. Millions of women thus will not receive contraceptive coverage without cost-sharing through the Mandate. Having granted so many exemptions already, the Government cannot show a compelling interest in denying one to these plaintiffs.

Second, the court also rejected Obama's last minute claim that Obamacare's contraception mandate, as implemented for religious organizations, did not, in fact, mandate contraception:

Here, the Government implicitly acknowledges that applying the Mandate to plaintiffs may in fact do nothing at all to expand contraceptive coverage, because plaintiffs’ TPAs aren’t actually required to do anything after receiving the self-certification. In other words, the Mandate forces plaintiffs to fill out a form which, though it violates their religious beliefs, may ultimately serve no purpose whatsoever. A law that is totally ineffective cannot serve a compelling interest.

(Emphasis added)

Finally, the court also rejected the government's argument that Obama's failure to convince Congress to "fix" Obamacare authorized him to enforce his contraception mandate in the manner he did:

Nor is the Mandate the least restrictive means by which the Government can improve public health and equalize women’s access to healthcare. ... The Government could provide the contraceptive services or insurance coverage directly to plaintiffs’ employees, or work with third parties – be it insurers, health care providers, drug manufacturers, or non-profits – to do so without requiring plaintiffs’ active participation.
...

The Government first argues that the alternatives above are infeasible because the defendants lack statutory authority to enact some of them. This argument makes no sense; in any challenge to the constitutionality of a federal law, the question is whether the federal government could adopt a less restrictive means, not any particular branch within it. It would set a dangerous precedent to hold that if the Executive Branch cannot act unilaterally, then there is no alternative solution. If defendants lack the required statutory authority, Congress may pass appropriate legislation.

(Emphasis added)

Considering how often Obama has justified his expansion of executive power on Congress' failure to do his bidding, yesterday's ruling was not only a huge victory for religious liberty, but a huge win for limited government in all spheres as well.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: contraceptionmandate; executivepower; obama; obamacare

1 posted on 12/17/2013 2:46:47 PM PST by jazusamo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Ha! Drudge has a headline that Bammy was pitching HealthDisaster2013 during an NSA meeting.

His signature disaster.


2 posted on 12/17/2013 2:49:45 PM PST by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Judges need health care too and they are also getting increases along with lowered coverage.

And most of them are not exempt from obozocare.


3 posted on 12/17/2013 2:49:53 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Fight Tapinophobia in all its forms! Do not submit to arduus privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
"This argument makes no sense.."

THAT pretty much sums up Bammy.

4 posted on 12/17/2013 2:50:00 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Bump!


5 posted on 12/17/2013 2:50:04 PM PST by txrangerette ("...hold to the truth; speak without fear." (Glenn Beck))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

While it is nice to see drops of disinfectant here and there being made on parts of this turd, the whole thing still needs to be flushed.


6 posted on 12/17/2013 2:50:53 PM PST by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Are we starting to see a trend, maybe?


7 posted on 12/17/2013 2:51:02 PM PST by vg0va3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Barry’s veneer of perfection and Jarrett’s cloak of terror are starting, ever so slightly, to lose their effect.


8 posted on 12/17/2013 2:52:34 PM PST by Paine in the Neck (Socialism consumes everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

My bet is Baraq was pitching hard for some massive 2014 campaign contributions from those oligarchs. So he can complete his “agenda”.


9 posted on 12/17/2013 2:52:49 PM PST by nascarnation (Wish everyone see a "Gay Kwanzaa")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

0bamacare is a great big pile of turd ...

Last I knew, you put that in a barrel, down-wind, soak it with jet fuel and burn it.

Jus’ sayin’ ...


10 posted on 12/17/2013 2:52:55 PM PST by NorthMountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
THAT pretty much sums up Bammy.

My exact thought, and that's for most everything the turkey does.

11 posted on 12/17/2013 2:52:59 PM PST by jazusamo ([Obama] A Truly Great Phony -- Thomas Sowell http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3058949/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Ping...


12 posted on 12/17/2013 2:53:56 PM PST by txrangerette ("...hold to the truth; speak without fear." (Glenn Beck))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vg0va3

Sorta looks that way, let’s hope it compounds.


13 posted on 12/17/2013 2:55:23 PM PST by jazusamo ([Obama] A Truly Great Phony -- Thomas Sowell http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3058949/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Just in case there was any doubt as to why the nuclear option was utilized. The Democrats are going to pack the district court with as many Leftist fanatics as possible, as fast as possible.

Judges who actually respect the constitution are dangerous!


14 posted on 12/17/2013 2:56:04 PM PST by Junk Silver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

Amen Brother:

I am starting to hope that this thing will be destroyed by legal means.

It is so obviously UnConstitutional.

But we still have to remember what Justice Roberts did to us last time.


15 posted on 12/17/2013 2:56:08 PM PST by Venturer (Half Staff the Flag of the US for Terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

“A law that is totally ineffective cannot serve a compelling interest.”

So... That would mean that ALL gun laws are unconstitutional.


16 posted on 12/17/2013 2:57:11 PM PST by thorvaldr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2; jazusamo

>> “This argument makes no sense..”

>> THAT pretty much sums up Bammy.

Ha! And they say the South African translator was signing gibberish...


17 posted on 12/17/2013 2:57:21 PM PST by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

I believe it will all be flushed....because it is/was/cannot be...made secure. Just too many cooks in the kitchen.


18 posted on 12/17/2013 2:58:15 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: thorvaldr
" That would mean that ALL gun laws are unconstitutional. "

Certainly the parts about barrel length and gun mufflers.

19 posted on 12/17/2013 2:58:46 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Do not sign up.


20 posted on 12/17/2013 3:03:30 PM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Don’t Muslims believe insurance as a whole to be against their religion?


21 posted on 12/17/2013 3:03:57 PM PST by outofsalt (If history teaches us anything it's that history rarely teaches us anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

After watching Roberts “change” his mind into his decision about OBAMAMCARE being a tax, I wonder if he will recuse himself from an NSA cases since that surveillance is the only justifiable reason for his evolution on the OBAMACARE matter.


22 posted on 12/17/2013 3:08:08 PM PST by vg0va3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: outofsalt

It seems I read that some time in the past.


23 posted on 12/17/2013 3:10:06 PM PST by jazusamo ([Obama] A Truly Great Phony -- Thomas Sowell http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3058949/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

I hope the good judge has all of his tax returns ready. He should also be expecting some 3am phone call detailing his daughter’s clothing selection earlier in the day.


24 posted on 12/17/2013 3:11:57 PM PST by grumpygresh (Democrats delenda est. New US economy: Fascism on top, Socialism on the bottom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: outofsalt

Then why are they allowed to drive cars? Liability insurance is required in order to license an automobile.


25 posted on 12/17/2013 3:14:28 PM PST by reg45 (Barack 0bama: Implementing class warfare by having no class.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

I hope bummer care get taken down like Jonnie Cash’s Cadillac - “One Piece at a Time”, but faster.


26 posted on 12/17/2013 3:15:15 PM PST by Arrowhead1952 (The Second Amendment is NOT about the right to hunt. It IS a right to shoot tyrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Judicial tyranny vs. Executive tyranny.

Legislating from the bench meets legislating from the White Hut.

Grab the popcorn!


27 posted on 12/17/2013 3:17:08 PM PST by lightman (O Lord, save Thy people and bless Thine inheritance, giving to Thy Church vict'ry o'er Her enemies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arrowhead1952

Well said, I remember that from quite awhile back, liked it. :-)


28 posted on 12/17/2013 3:17:38 PM PST by jazusamo ([Obama] A Truly Great Phony -- Thomas Sowell http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3058949/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
Do not sign up.

On that subject, do any tax FReepers here know exactly how the gooberment will know who has and who doesn't have health insurance? Will the IRS be deployed as the information gatherer?

29 posted on 12/17/2013 3:17:47 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

It makes no Constitutional sense, it makes tyrannical sense.


30 posted on 12/17/2013 3:18:37 PM PST by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

I hope somebody is ready to get series ;-) about the BC when this train really gets rollin’!!


31 posted on 12/17/2013 3:20:52 PM PST by SgtHooper (If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: outofsalt

Not if it destroys the infidels.


32 posted on 12/17/2013 3:21:48 PM PST by SgtHooper (If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: outofsalt

how the heck do muslims drive if their religion forbids insurance.


33 posted on 12/17/2013 3:22:06 PM PST by Donnafrflorida (Thru HIM all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

When lawsuits start over the delayed employer mandate, health insurance plans legal for 2013 but not 2014 and other “executive orders” and “administrative rulings” that alter the law, judges have a conundrum. Do they rule on the law, or do they research what dictates were in effect at the time and rule based on that, or do they rule based on the dictates of the present time?


34 posted on 12/17/2013 3:27:39 PM PST by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tbw2

The Judges are going to need to go shopping for paddles.


35 posted on 12/17/2013 3:37:29 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Just have to see if the Chief Justice can be blackmailed again. We had some neighbors that are “middle of the road” voters and they voted for 0, since he was running on “free health care” for all.

He went on a rant on his FB page. I don’t get on there but my wife showed me his latest ramblings. I told her to tell him, John told you, “If you think health care is expensive now, wait until it’s free”.

No reply in the past two weeks. His premiums shot up, and his deductible more than tripled. Serves them right.


36 posted on 12/17/2013 3:45:57 PM PST by Arrowhead1952 (The Second Amendment is NOT about the right to hunt. It IS a right to shoot tyrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Arrowhead1952

Love to hear about cases like that. It’s amazing how many supporters of libs change their views when they get hit in the wallet.


37 posted on 12/17/2013 3:51:55 PM PST by jazusamo ([Obama] A Truly Great Phony -- Thomas Sowell http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3058949/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: fwdude
On that subject, do any tax FReepers here know exactly how the gooberment will know who has and who doesn't have health insurance? Will the IRS be deployed as the information gatherer?

Yes. The IRS will start with the assumption that you do NOT have healthcare and thus owe the penalty. It will be up to you to prove you have coverage and thereby reduce the penalty to zero. It will be cross-checked by insurers issuing the equivalent of a 1099 so the IRS can see if you are lying.

All those listening to "Navigators" who tell them to lie will have a rude awakening come April 15, 2015. I'll bet paying back improperly claimed subsidies will not be exempt from the tender mercies of the IRS collection arm. They might even find ways to make it a criminal charge. There's a poop storm a comin'.

38 posted on 12/17/2013 4:06:16 PM PST by NonValueAdded (It's not the penalty, it's the lack of coverage on 1 Jan. Think about it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

39 posted on 12/17/2013 4:07:37 PM PST by Jeff Chandler (Obamacare: You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

He was blackmailing them. He is into sub law intimidation mode.


40 posted on 12/17/2013 4:32:37 PM PST by lavaroise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

How about rejecting the individual mandate now.


41 posted on 12/17/2013 5:08:48 PM PST by headstamp 2 (What would Scooby do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: outofsalt

“Don’t Muslims believe insurance as a whole to be against their religion?”

That’s what I understand. It’s why Muslims and Amish can certify themselves for an exemption.


42 posted on 12/18/2013 3:05:27 PM PST by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson