Colo. company secures injunction against HHS mandate

Last updated on: July 27, 2012 at 9:23 pm by CNA Daily News

Colo. company secures injunction against HHS mandate 2012-07-27T21:23:00+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.

Denver, Colo., Jul 27, 2012 / 03:23 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- In the first legal ruling against the controversial HHS mandate, a federal judge has granted a temporary injunction protecting a Catholic-run business.

Judge John L. Kane of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado approved the injunction on the afternoon of July 27.

He said the harm of preventing the government from enforcing Congress-approved regulations “pales in comparison to the possible infringement upon plaintiffs’ constitutional and statutory rights.”

The Alliance Defending Freedom legal group sought the injunction as part of its lawsuit on behalf of Hercules Industries, a Colorado-based manufacturer of heating, ventilation and air conditioning units.

“We’re thrilled,” said Matt Bowman, legal counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom.

“This is the first court to answer the question of whether Obamacare can be used to violate religious freedom, and the answer is ‘no,’” he told CNA July 27.

“The very first ruling on the question of religious freedom was a ruling stating that religious freedom prevails over government attempts to force believers to choose between their faith and their livelihood,” Bowman said.

Hercules Industries’ owners, William Newland, Paul Newland, James Newland, and Christine Ketterhagen, all identify as practicing Catholics. The mandate would have affected the self-insured company’s health plan when it renews on Nov. 1.

Under the HHS mandate, companies that refuse to comply face fines of $100 per day, per employee. For a company like Hercules Industries, which employs 300 people, those fines could be millions of dollars each year.

The company and its owners challenged the Department of Health and Human Services rule requiring employers’ health plans to cover sterilization, contraception, and abortion-causing drugs as preventive care for women.

The mandate’s narrow religious exemption does not include many Catholic health systems, charities and colleges, despite Catholic objections to covering the procedures and drugs. It also does not apply to secular businesses.

Bowman said that although the mandate only protects the Newland family and their business, it sets an example for other legal challenges already underway.

“Every judge in these cases is going to look at what other judges said,” Bowman explained.

“The reasoning behind the injunction is that every American, including family business owners, is entitled to practice their faith without the government forcing them to violate their beliefs or face heavy fines or penalties.”

Judge Kane said the government’s arguments against the injunction are “countered, and indeed outweighed, by the public interest in the free exercise of religion.”

He cited a Tenth Circuit Court ruling which said that there is a “strong public interest in the free exercise of religion” even where that interest may conflict with another statutory scheme.

Michael Norton, senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the lawsuit is “very important” because it determines “whether family-owned small businesses have the freedom to practice their faith as they wish in the public square and in the public arena, or whether they will be obliged to offer health insurance coverage that violates that faith.”

“Our view is that every American should be free to live and do business according to their faith. They should not have to choose between their faith and doing what some bureaucrat or politician thinks ought to be the way they live out their faith,” Norton said in a July 26 interview.

Two lawsuits against the HHS mandate have been dismissed.

On July 17, a federal judge in Nebraska rejected a suit filed by seven state attorneys general, Catholic groups and two Catholic individuals on the grounds they did not prove immediate harm. On July 18, a federal judge in Washington, D.C. dismissed the suit filed by Belmont Abbey College on the grounds it was premature.

Updated at 4:09 p.m. MST. Adds details about fines, comments from Judge Kane and Michael Norton, and background on related cases.

Previous Post

July 27, 2012

Catholic Relief Services tried to minimize risk of scandal with aid group

Next Post

July 27, 2012 New San Francisco archbishop vows to support marriage, immigrants

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

I carried a letter from the king giving me authority and resources to rebuild Jerusalem. Who am I?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Artaxerxes Nehemiah Zerubbabel Ezra