Employers can opt out of paying for contraception, US Supreme Court says

In a split decision by the justices of the US Supreme Court, Hobby Lobby had won its appeal to reject the contraception mandate in the Affordable Care Act of President Barack Obama. According to the 5-4 ruling written by Justice Samuel Alito, the contraceptive provision in Obamacare violated the religious freedom of some employers under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). On the other hand, the sharply-divided court fell short of explaining why companies should not be able to claim RFRA protections.

According to Alito, the contraception mandate substantially burdened the plaintiff's exercise of religion. Alito also declined to provide a distinction between corporations and individuals when it comes to fundamental rights, the Wall Street Journal observed.

Referring to Hobby Lobby and Mardel Christian & Education Stores Inc, which is also owned by the same company that controls the crafts chain of stores, he wrote, "A corporation is simply a form of organization used by human beings to achieve desired ends. And protecting the free-exercise rights of corporations like Hobby Lobby, Conestoga and Mardel protects the religious liberty of the humans who own and control those companies."

New White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest on behalf of the Obama administration expressed disappointment over the ruling, and argued that carving out that piece of the president's healthcare law essentially jeopardizes women's health in America.

He said, "We believe that the owners of for-profit companies should not be allowed to assert their personal religious views to deny their employees federally mandated benefits. It is our view .... that Congress needs to take action to solve this problem that's been created, and the administration stands ready to work with them do so."

Washington appellate attorney Thomas Goldstein, who runs the SCOTUSblog.com court opinion blog, said that the Supreme Court ruling would obviously serve a primer for other challenges to Obama's pet law.

He wrote, "This case isn't that practically important, except for the employees and businesses involved. There just aren't a huge number of those. But everyone can agree the social questions presented - about when people can follow their religious convictions, and when people are entitled to contraception care - are truly important."

Tags

Hobby Lobby, Hobby Lobby contraceptive insurance coverage lawsuit, US Supreme Court, Hobby Lobby lawsuit verdict

© 2023 Lawyer Herald All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.