Posted on 06/30/2014 9:30:42 AM PDT by PoloSec
Hobby Lobby cant be forced to pay for contraception coverage for their employees!
This ruling was 5-4 with Alito writing the opinion.
Will bring more as soon as I have it
UPDATE: More
AP The Supreme Court says corporations can hold religious objections that allow them to opt out of the new health law requirement that they cover contraceptives for women.
The justices 5-4 decision Monday is the first time that the high court has ruled that profit-seeking businesses can hold religious views under federal law. And it means the Obama administration must search for a different way of providing free contraception to women who are covered under objecting companies health insurance plans.
UPDATE 2: This from Mark Levins Facebook:
Prediction: Having suffered recent losses at the Supreme Court (which, incidentally, are narrower than most are reporting), watch Obama start a smear campaign against the justices
UPDATE 3: Its important to remember that this case wasnt about contraception per se, but about abortion. There are around sixteen other types of contraception that Hobby Lobby does cover:
Its also important to note that the business owners objections were not to contraception, per se, but to abortion. They argued that four types of contraception required to be covered amounted to abortion, as Alito noted and which Solicitor General, in arguing the Obama Administration case in March, has rejected as contrary to any ordinary understanding of what abortion is. Alito:
The owners of the businesses have religious objections to abortion, and according to their religious beliefs the four contraceptive methods at issue are abortifacients. If the owners comply with the HHS mandate, they believe they will be facilitating abortions, and if they do not comply,they will pay a very heavy priceas much as $1.3 million per day, or about $475 million per year, in the case of one of the companies. If these consequences do not amount to a substantial burden, it is hard to see what would.
This is why I worry about the Little Sisters of the Poor case. That is about the much more broad mandate of contraceptives.
I don’t disagree that contraception is an authentic moral problem. But unless there is an actual unique human life at stake, its not abortion. Potential human lives can be considered, but thats a slippery slope. If one chooses to wait a few years to get married, because they don’t want to have children until they are financially secure, they are preventing conception, are they not? And there may be a moral breach in such decisions. But not murder. Abortion is murder. Contraception is not always murder. Keeping the distinction clear helps us win hearts and minds for the cause of the unborn. You can’t legislate against every violation of God’s will for our lives (we’d all be in prison!). But you can legislate against murder. That’s how we win. Keep the definition consistent. That’s all I’m saying.
Absolutely!
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
“As it is now, the 5-4 rulings today were way too close.”
Exactly!
Over the last few years, too many of these ruling have been way too close.
We (the conservatives) are one heart attack or one stroke away from allowing Obama to pick the next Supreme Court justice.
And we all know what’s gonna happen then. We will sit back and watch (at least for the next 20 years) as an Obama-appointed court turns this nation’s laws and culture into a giant pile of ____.
I fear for our nation now. I will fear even more for it with the next nomination.
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.