Posted on 10/10/2017 3:36:36 PM PDT by mdittmar
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Ferguson asks court in Seattle to declare new rules unlawful
SEATTLE — Attorney General Bob Ferguson today filed a lawsuit in federal court to block the Trump Administration’s new rules undermining women’s access to contraception.
The new rules would allow any company to deny coverage for contraceptive services to its female employees based on religious grounds. Additionally, certain types of organizations would also be able to deny this coverage on moral grounds.
If allowed to go forward, President Trump’s rules could have a significant impact on the more than 1.5 million Washington workers and their dependents who receive insurance through their employer’s self-funded plan. One study by the Center for American Progress found that contraception costs can generally exceed $1,000 a year without insurance coverage.
Some Washington women who currently use contraception may be denied no-cost coverage and be forced to turn to state-funded programs to receive the care they need. State-funded reproductive health services helped more than 90,000 patients in 2016 alone. More than three-quarters of those patients were women who used contraception, saving the state an estimated $160 million in maternal and birth-related costs, according to a report from the Washington State Department of Health.
“President Trump’s contraception rules are unfair, unlawful, and unconstitutional,” said Ferguson. “I refuse to let President Trump disregard our laws and our constitution in an effort to deny women access to contraception.”
The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, alleges that the new rules violate the U.S. Constitution, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the Civil Rights Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.
Constitutional violations
The Trump Administration’s contraception rules violate two constitutional provisions –– the First and Fifth Amendments.
The rules violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by requiring individuals to bear the burdens of religions to which they do not belong. For example, the rules permit a for-profit business to impose the costs of its owner’s anti-contraception beliefs on employees who do not share those beliefs.
Only women, and not men, may have their contraceptive coverage denied based on their employer’s religious or moral objection. By making a gender-based distinction without sufficient justification, the rules violate the equal protection guarantee implicit in the Fifth Amendment.
Affordable Care Act violations
The Affordable Care Act guarantees preventive care at no added cost to patients. This includes preventive services specific to women’s health, including the full range of FDA-approved contraceptive methods. The Trump Administration’s new rules violate the ACA in multiple ways.
The new rules unlawfully contradict certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act, such as a prohibition against gender- or religious-based discrimination in health care access.
The ACA also prohibits any rule that “creates any unreasonable barrier to the ability of individuals to obtain appropriate medical care” or “limits the availability of health care treatment for the full duration of a patient’s medical needs.” The Trump Administration’s new rules violates both of these provisions.
Other legal violations
The contraception rules violate the Civil Rights Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.
The Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination against women based on sex or the capacity to be pregnant. The rules result in women having less access to reproductive health care, which is discrimination based on their gender.
In addition, the Trump Administration issued the rules without proper notice or the opportunity for public comment, thereby violating the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs federal agency rule-making.
Ferguson is asking the court for an order declaring the new rules unlawful and an injunction halting their implementation. In addition to blocking the rule, the lawsuit seeks to recover costs and fees.
The lead attorneys in the case for Washington are Assistant Attorneys General Jeff Sprung and Alicia Young.
In 2017, the Attorney General’s Office has prevailed four times against the Trump Administration. Every court to have issued a decision has ruled in favor of the Washington Attorney General’s Office in cases it has brought against the Trump Administration.
The Trump Administration’s contraception rules violate two constitutional provisions –– the First and Fifth Amendments.
The rules violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by requiring individuals to bear the burdens of religions to which they do not belong. For example, the rules permit a for-profit business to impose the costs of its owner’s anti-contraception beliefs on employees who do not share those beliefs.
Only women, and not men, may have their contraceptive coverage denied based on their employer’s religious or moral objection. By making a gender-based distinction without sufficient justification, the rules violate the equal protection guarantee implicit in the Fifth Amendment.
Hmm?,I don't like my employer not paying for my beer.
Here's an old song I like;)
In the first place, this was such mindless pandering.
It was mind numbing dumb.
While I’m sure it garnered the Dike Feminist Lobby, I’ll bet it caused a lot of people to simply groan and shake their head.
Yet another privileged class...
Abortion is NOT contraception.
What do you call a lawyer at the bottom of the lake?
All these suits are to raise his value in the eyes of the King County voters (all of whom are card carrying socialists and have the virtual majority vote over the rest of the state)
Our present idiot, I mean Governor, is term limited.
Naturally, the 9th Circus steps up to insist on insanity.
A good start???
Are these people STUPID???
They are NOT being denied access,they are being denied payment by a few insurers or employers.
The can have all of the birth control that they want.
This Ferguson should be ashamed of himself.
.
.
So the Constitution requires employers to pay for birth control, but nobody figured that out for over 200 years. Amazing ...
He’s just a craven politician pandering for votes. He could not care less for true justice and true human rights. He’s a bum and a bully, and an frenzied rabid enabler of those who will beat to death the last remaining shreds of Righteousness and the Judeo-Christian Sex Ethic that brought us the overwhelming blessings that we have enjoyed. His end will not be a good one. Let us pray that his blindness is cured.
“undermining” means free paid by my taxes.
>>Progress found that contraception costs can generally exceed $1,000 a year without insurance coverage.<<
Where were these easy broads when I was in college??
If I was “smart” I would have signed up for “SlutzOPlenty” when I was in college!
We need a legal definition of access. Word smithies run amuck.
Translation: Ferguson wants to make sure that YOU keep paying for THEIR boinking.
Why don’t conservatives get smart and make complaints in Texas for everything Trump does and when it gets shot down it’ll create a precedent? These things keep starting in Seattle and Califronia and Washington. Bogus! Pure usurping of power for the Judicial branch
"The birth control pill, patch, and ring usually cost about $20–$50 per month. The birth control shot costs about $30–$75 per shot. The shot protects against pregnancy for 12 weeks.
Some health care providers require that women have exams before they’re prescribed hormonal birth control, and others do not. If needed, an exam usually costs about $35–$250.
Many Planned Parenthood health centers offer reduced-fee services to teens with little or no income."
What sick twisted logic communist have. Worship Sanger instead of Jesus.
Pass the XXVIII Amendment stating birth control is inalienable right
Good luck with that.
$1,000 per year for preventative contraception? Not buying it.
How does this undermine “women’s access”?
It’s been a while since I bought rubbers, but you can buy a 100 Trojans Pleasure Pak on Amazon for the cost of two beers. A month of Ortho-Tricyclen (temporary chemical sterilization for females) costs $37.
How much freakin’ access are the taxpayers supposed to provide?
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.