Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Catholic News

Home

Home
Catholic
Religion News
Court ruling allows religious freedom lawsuits to proceed with hope

Court ruling allows religious freedom lawsuits to proceed with hope

Last updated on: June 28, 2012 at 8:07 pm by CNA Daily News

Court ruling allows religious freedom lawsuits to proceed with hope 2012-06-28T20:07:00+00:00 CNA Daily News

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Washington D.C., Jun 28, 2012 / 02:07 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the 2010 health care law, a leading religious freedom law firm has new confidence in the future of its lawsuits against the federal contraception mandate.

Hannah Smith, senior counsel at The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, explained that the arguments against the law that were recently rejected by the court are “separate and distinct legal challenges” from those being brought against the contraception mandate.

In a June 28 press call shortly after the Supreme Court announced its ruling, Smith said that in this case, the court was not asked to review the religious liberty issues surrounding the contraception mandate.

Rather, its decision dealt solely with the overarching law itself, particularly a requirement that virtually everyone must buy health insurance and a provision dealing with the expansion of Medicaid.

The high court upheld the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act by a vote of 5-4, but did not rule on the contraception mandate, a separate requirement issued by the Department of Health and Human Services under the authority of the act.

This controversial mandate will require employers to offer health insurance plans that cover contraception, sterilization and early abortion-inducing drugs, even if doing so violates their consciences. Failure to comply will result in crippling fines.

The mandate has been criticized by members of various religions and political affiliations, including bishops from every diocese of the U.S., who warned that it could force Catholic hospitals, schools and charitable agencies to close down.

More than 50 plaintiffs – including nonprofit organizations, Catholic dioceses, religious universities and private business owners – have filed lawsuits against the mandate, arguing that it violates the religious liberty of individuals and organizations that object to its requirements.

If the court had struck down the health care law, the mandate would have disappeared by default. Since it did not, Smith explained, the legal battles will move forward, untouched.

However, she said, two statements in the June 28 decision hint at what the court’s future ruling on the contraception mandate could be.

She pointed to the majority opinion, penned by Chief Justice John Roberts, which states, “Even if the taxing power enables Congress to impose a tax on not obtaining health insurance, any tax must still comply with other requirements in the Constitution.”

The opinion of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, was even more explicit, she said.

Ginsberg wrote, “A mandate to purchase a particular product would be unconstitutional if, for example, the edict impermissibly abridged the freedom of speech, interfered with the free exercise of religion, or infringed on a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause.”

The direct mention of religious freedom as a reason to find such a mandate unconstitutional is a hopeful sign in the battle over the contraception requirement, Smith said.

She explained that these two statements are “essential” in suggesting that the court may strike down the contraception mandate if asked to rule on it, a positive indication for defenders of religious freedom.

Mark Rienzi, law professor at The Catholic University of America and senior counsel at the Becket Fund, added that it is “commonplace” for courts to find a regulation unconstitutional even when the law under which it was issued is constitutionally acceptable.

The Becket Fund, a non-profit law firm that works to protect religious freedom for all people, has paved the way in challenging the mandate, representing four different clients in filing lawsuits against it.

In a statement shortly after the ruling, Smith explained that the Becket Fund’s lawsuits will continue making their way through the court system.

“Never in history has there been a mandate forcing individuals to violate their deeply held religious beliefs or pay a severe fine, a fine which could force many homeless shelters, charities, and religious institutions to shut their doors,” she said.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

June 28, 2012

Archbishop urges honesty among Argentina's leaders

Next Post

June 28, 2012 US bishops urge Congress to 'fix' problems in health care law

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Americas Asia - Pacific Europe Middle East - Africa Uncategorized US Vatican

Select a Month November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which official opposed Nehemiah's wall-building and sent open letters to Jerusalem?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Sanballat Haggai Geshem Tobiah