Skip to comments.Four injunctions against the Obamacare contraceptive mandate (all in one day: a new record!)
Posted on 01/01/2014 11:23:57 AM PST by Mrs. Don-o
Is this some kind of record? On the last day of 2013 four different federal appeals courts issued temporary injunctions against enforcement of the Obamacare contraceptive mandate. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals acted on two different cases, Michigan Catholic Conference v. Sebelius and The Catholic Diocese of Nashville et al v. Sebelius, while the DC Circuit Court of Appeals acted in The Catholic Archbishop of Washington et al v Sebelius. Meanwhile, no less than Obama-appointee Sonia Sotomayor issued an injunction in the case of The Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged, Denver, v Sebelius.
All in all, quite a way to kick off Obamacare.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Little Sisters of the Poor, who staff homes for the elderly poor, say they will LEAVE THE USA rather than participate in funding contraception, sterilization, and abortion.
"If you have religious 'free exercise' you can keep your 'free exercise' --- elsewhere."
If the poor sisters do not comply, they face hefty fines. Although it varies between locations, some face amounts of $100 per employee, per day. Fines could have started today, Jan. 1, 2014, without this temporary injunction.
The Little Sisters are being defended pro-bono by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, whose clients have included religions from A-Z: Anglicans to Zoroastrians. The Becket Fund has defended dozens of faiths including: Amish, Buddhists, Evangelical Christians, Hindus, Jews, Lutherans, Mormons, Native Americans, Non-Denominational Christians, Presbyterians, Roman Catholics, Santeros, Sikhs, Unitarian Universalists, and Zoroastrians.
Supreme Court of the United States
LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR HOME FOR THE AGED, DENVER,
COLORADO, A COLORADO NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, ET AL.,
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES, ET AL.
O R D E R
UPON CONSIDERATION of the application of counsel for the
IT IS ORDERED that respondents are temporarily enjoined from
enforcing against applicants the contraceptive coverage requirements
imposed by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, 42 U. S. C.
§ 300gg-13(a)(4), and related regulations pending the receipt of a response
and further order of the undersigned or of the Court. The response to the
application is due Friday, January 3, 2014, by 10 a.m.
/s/ Sonia Sotomayor
Associate Justice of the Supreme
Court of the United States
Dated this 31st
day of December 2013.
Do the “Little Sisters of the Poor” still field a football team?
In law, intervention is a procedure to allow a nonparty, called intervenor to join ongoing litigation, either as a matter of right or at the discretion of the court, without the permission of the original litigants. The basic rationale for intervention is that a judgment in a particular case may affect the rights of nonparties, who ideally should have the right to be heard.
Justice Sotomayor grants temporary Obamacare exemption to nuns.
Sotomayor gave the government until Friday to file a response in the case. Her order extends only to the group of nuns and does not apply more broadly to the Affordable Care Act and its requirements.
Sotomayor, an Obama appointee, is at risk for an objection by an intervenor objecting to the appointments of an ineligible President. Appointments by an ineligible President are a violation of the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution. A sustained objection will require a hearing on Presidential eligibility or the Justice must recuse.
Yes, we call them the Browns.
Yes; they beat the Redskins this season.
Oh no....don’t let the SCOTUS rule on this with John “Sell-Out” Roberts casting the swing vote again. He’s afraid of the Obama thugs who must have something devastating on this coward.
Did the Founders provide an impeachment mechanism for wayward Supreme Court justices? If not, they should have.
This is the first I've read about the intervention procedure. Does Sotomayer's tailored order preclude an intervenor at this point?
A narrow ruling, covers the Little Sisters only. What would have been earth-shattering is if the Wise Latina enjoined enforcement in toto.
She is Obama's "triggerwoman"!
Too bad. I was hoping the term “response” was vague enough that it left the door open to an intervention by a third party.
You know what? Voters, both political parties, are so fed up that they’ll forgive just about anything in a politician’s past as long as they don’t allow themselves to be blackmailed. What we won’t forgive is backstabbing traitors who would rather sacrifice us than suffer some personal embarrassment.
Did these people finally find their souls?
You must not be aware of the supposed blackmailing from Obama. About Roberts’ adopted children.
Do a search for Roberts and obamacare.
Very well said...however the experience we have had to date is that the politician folds to the Obama administration.