Skip to comments.DC Circuit Court Strikes Down Obamacare Mandate
Posted on 11/06/2013 5:54:10 PM PST by marshmallow
On November 1, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decided Gilardi v. HHS ruling against the controversial "birth control mandate" instituted under Obamacare. People of faith from around the nation have waited for an answer on this question, with nearly 75 similar cases pending in federal courts. While this decision is a major victory for religious liberty, the issue will likely face another round at the U.S. Supreme Court.
Under the Affordable Care Act, employer-paid health insurance plans (for companies with over 50 workers) must offer free "preventive care" which subsequent guidelines define as "all FDA-approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity, as prescribed by a health care provider."
The plaintiffs in the case were brothers Francis and Philip Gilardi, owners of Freshway Foods and Freshway Logistics, who have nearly 400 employees. The brothers filed suit on the basis that Obamacare's contraceptive mandate obstructs their right of free exercise as protected by the Constitution and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in that the mandate conflicts with their Catholic faith.
(Excerpt) Read more at christianpost.com ...
This only applies to the employer mandate? Why should individuals buying insurance be required to violate their own moral codes?
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
This ruling (corporate mandate) should be used as a precedent for all.
>> The opinion, authored by Alabama native Judge Janice Rogers Brown
Janice Rogers Brown absolutely ROCKS. She is one person that the ‘rats would move heaven and earth to keep off of the Supreme Court.
She is a small-government Christian conservative who has written extensively about the inherently perverse and corrupt nature of government, reasoning therefore that government ought to be kept small.
She also just happens to be black.
>> Why should individuals buying insurance be required to violate their own moral codes?
There are exceptions for individuals, as long as the individual is Muslim.
What does this ruling mean for us in practical terms for those buying insurance?
And Bush’s fault, too.
It should be and probably will so long as the SCOTUS upholds this ruling. I am guessing they will force someone to bring a separate suit to get a separate ruling though. They’re not going to give up an inch without a fight.
Great decision, Judge Brown!
If this goes to the Supreme Court, maybe a lawsuit brought by an individual will be close behind.
I have a feeling that is how it will go.
>> And Bushs fault, too.
IIRC, she was at least under consideration to fill a Supreme Court vacancy during W’s term. Wouldn’t THAT have given the ‘rats the vapors...
Glad he was able to get her appointed to the Federal bench *somewhere*, at least.
W has documented her as one of the finest legal minds he’s ever run across.
>> W has documented her as one of the finest legal minds hes ever run across.
Better than Harriet Meiers? :-)
I think that is going to change and may be part of the reason the GOP-e hasn't fought to kill obamacare. Mid-size businesses are probably looking forward to dropping health insurance as a benefit. When the price increases and plan limitations hit them next year, as they have hit people like me this year, a lot of businesses will start paying a stipend to employees for health insurance and pay the penalty.
...a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decided Gilardi v. HHS ruling against the controversial "birth control mandate" instituted under Obamacare.Take a little, take a little, take a little more, until you have it all.
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.