That is the only possible constitutional ruling, and I thank God that the judge followed the Constitution. I’m still disgusted with Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and Sebelius over their immeasurable evil in attempting to impose this requirement, but it’s nice that a judge saw the light.
Wait until Quisling Roberts gets through manipulating the language and intent.
I agree with that. The really insightful part of this judge's ruling that struck me was this:
Duffey also held that the federal government's interests in promoting public health and providing women with equal access to health care was not compelling in this case "because the contraceptive mandate does not apply to the insurance plans of millions of women in this country.""Grandfathered health plans, small businesses and religious employers are all exempt from the contraceptive mandate," he wrote. "The government's claim that it has a compelling interest in enforcing the accommodation against [Catholic Education of North Georgia] and Catholic Charities because it seeks to promote the uniform availability of contraceptive products and services is severely undermined by the exemptions to the contraceptive mandate that leave millions of women without coverage for contraceptive care."
The law, Religious Freedom Restoration Act, says that the government has an extra burden in the case of religion to prove they have a serious, compelling reason to over-ride anyone's religious freedom.
This judge is basically saying that the government is handing out exemptions right and left on this "serious, compelling reason" and that it thereby demonstrates that their reason doesn't really rise to the level of serious and compelling and necessary to over-ride a religious freedom.
This is an honest, insightful judge.
I hadn't thought of that, but it is right on the money. You can't run around saying, "This is serious, life-threatening, critical and we have to overturn the 1st amendment over this" and then turn around and say, "Except for my friends over here who are getting exemptions 'cause none of this is really that critical."
This is a direct violation of the RFRA and thence to the 1st Amendment.