Obama admin. drops appeals in three for-profit mandate cases

Last updated on: September 4, 2014 at 10:47 pm by CNA Daily News

Obama admin. drops appeals in three for-profit mandate cases 2014-09-04T22:47:00+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., Sep 4, 2014 / 04:47 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Religious freedom advocates are voicing hope as the Obama administration drops its appeal in three lawsuits involving for-profit companies that object to the federal contraception mandate.

The Department of Justice has dropped its appeals in The Seneca Hardwood Lumber Company v. Burwell, Armstrong v. Burwell, and Briscoe v. Burwell, according to Alliance Defending Freedom, which is representing numerous individuals and organizations that have sued over the mandate.

“The administration was right to abandon its fight against the family businesses involved in these particular cases in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in June,” said Matt Bowman, senior legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, in a Sept. 4 statement.

“In a free and diverse society, we respect the freedom to live out our convictions. For these families, that means not being forced to participate in distributing abortion drugs and devices.”

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the mandate as it was applied to two “closely held” for-profit businesses, Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Services, saying that the owners of the companies were protected against the mandate by the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The court said that the government had not shown that the mandate was the least restrictive means of achieving its goal of providing free contraceptives to employees.

In response, the Obama administration announced a proposed change to the mandate Aug. 22, suggesting that “closely-held” for-profit companies that object to providing the coverage would be able to take part in an “accommodation” originally offered to non-profits.

This change will not be finalized until comments from the general public have been collected.

Issued by the Department of Health and Human Services under the 2010 Affordable Care Act, the federal mandate has been a subject of controversy for years because it requires employers to offer health insurance covering contraception, sterilization and some drugs that can cause early abortions.

Objections to the mandate have resulted in more than 300 lawsuits from individuals and groups protesting the regulation’s imposition on their religious beliefs. The opposition to the regulation has led the administration to change it numerous times in recent years.

The mandate includes a narrow exemption for houses of worship and their affiliates. Other non-profit religious groups that objected to the regulation were provided an “accommodation” under which they could sign forms authorizing their insurer or a third-party administrator to pay for the products instead.

The administration in August announced an “interim final rule” modifying the accommodation for non-profit groups. The rule states that instead of contacting their insurance companies directly, the groups can notify the federal government of their objections to the mandate, and the government will then contact their insurer or a third-party administrator, designating them to assume the costs of the contraception coverage deemed immoral by the employer.

Many religious groups objected to the arrangement, calling it an “accounting gimmick” and saying that it still required that they violate their religious beliefs by authorizing the provision of products and procedures they found immoral.

Under administration proposals, the accommodation would be extended to closely-held for-profit companies with objections to the mandate.

In the meantime, abandoning its appeals in several cases means that those companies will remain protected by initial court orders while the lawsuits proceed.

Lawyers at Alliance Defending Freedom saw the move as hopeful.

“All Americans should oppose unjust laws that force people – under threat of punishment by the IRS – to give up their freedom to live and work according to their beliefs,” stated Bowman.

Previous Post

September 4, 2014

Analyst: Vatican regards Islamic State as waging a 'war of religion'

Next Post

September 4, 2014 La. bishop applauds marriage ruling, commits to LGBT ministry

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

What was Paul's native language?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Greek Latin Aramaic Hebrew