Two Big SCOTUS Decisions Came Today

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

I'm still throwing a party about it. You and Shapiro can sulk with the Dems. I've known about the individual tax issue, and I don't believe that was part of this case. Why act surprised that we, as individuals, are still paying for it. AFAIK, there hasn't been a challenge on individuals paying for BC.




No, it's saying that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to not only non-profit religious organizations, but also to for-profit corporations. May not be a big deal to you, but I'm glad about it. Again, 90% of businesses in America (in 2000) would be affected by this legislation. And Ginsberg is worried there could be an even broader application to even more businesses.


Did you really expect Kagan, Sotomayer, Breyer or Ginsberg to vote for HL on this? Of course it's going to be a 5-4 vote! C'mon, you talk about focusing on reality. There's no way those 4 are going to vote for anything conservative or religious.

You and Shapiro aren't going to spoil this good moment. Was the war won, no, but one battle was for HL and the others. I'm going to take a moment and celebrate it with them.

Knock yourself out.

[Pressing-On]

The Fight Isn’t Over: Nuns, Others Still Face Obamacare Mandate Despite Today’s Hobby Lobby Decision

More than 300 other family businesses, schools, and religious organizations still must decide whether to violate their beliefs or face government penalties. Charitable organizations such as Little Sisters of the Poor and Mother Angelica’s Eternal Word Television Network (which is currently petitioning the Supreme Court for emergency relief from the mandate) will continue challenging the rule’s application to non-profit plaintiffs.

Nor is this mandate the only part of Obamacare that threatens the ability of Americans to purchase health care that aligns with their values. The health care law has given broad authority to bureaucrats to decide what insurance companies must cover, employers must provide and individuals must purchase. Government officials have the power to impose additional and even more onerous mandates for other controversial healthcare coverage with just the stroke of a pen.

To truly protect religious freedom and individual liberty, Obamacare must be stopped. Following today’s decision, Congress should continue working to implement patient-centered health reform that increases choice and respects Americans’ values and conscience rights.

UPDATE: This afternoon, the Eleventh Circuit issued an emergency stay against the HHS mandate for Eternal Word Television Network. Without that stay, the religious broadcasting organization would have had to comply with the coercive rule or face crippling fines by tomorrow (July 1).

http://dailysignal.com/2014/06/30/fi...paign=headline

I agree with appellate lawyer, Mark Arnold, about Hobby Lobby:

"A meaningless decision. The less restrictive alternative that the majority settled on is a certification by Hobby Lobby that it opposes contraceptive coverage, after which the insurance company must provide that coverage for free. Meaning that the premium charged to Hobby Lobby will necessarily include the cost of the free contraception. All smoke and mirrors."

We wouldn't be having this issue if not for Obamacare and its violation of our 1st Amendment rights.

And the Baltimore Hobby Lobby angle is … the Little Sisters

So what is the nature of the HHS mandate objections that remain for many religious ministries? Here is how the Sun took that on:

… (The) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services limited the scope of the requirement for some religiously affiliated organizations, such as hospitals and universities. Those groups are not required to pay for contraceptive coverage themselves if they sign a form stating their objection.

Employees of those groups may continue to receive coverage for birth control, but it is paid for by the insurance companies — and in some cases the government — not the employer.

Catholic groups, including the Little Sisters, have argued that the act of signing the form — and passing the responsibility off to an insurance company — makes them complicit in violating their religious doctrine. The group’s case could come before the Supreme Court as soon as next year.

That isn’t bad, yet it is incomplete. There are those who sincerely doubt that insurance companies will resist the temptation to simply pass these costs along to religious ministries in the form of raised rates or vague fees.

In other words, there is more to this question than whether religious believers are asked to sign what they see as an offensive piece of government paperwork that may or may not pass the buck to someone else.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/getreli...ittle-sisters/

[Pressing-On]

This is a great article which lays out my opinion very well.

The Hobbled Hobby Lobby Decision

At issue in Hobby Lobby was whether the Department of Health and Human Services could enforce against family-owned corporations an Obamacare regulation that required the corporations to buy health insurance for their employees that cover drugs and devices that can kill human beings by preventing them, as embryos, from implanting in their mothers' wombs.

The court voted 5 to 4 that HHS could not enforce this regulation against the corporations not because that would violate the owners' First Amendment rights to the free exercise of their religion — which tells them not to cooperate in killing humans — but because the regulation does not meet all the requirements set up by Religious Freedom Restoration Act for when the government can violate the free exercise of religion.

The First Amendment says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

RFRA says Congress can make laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion for certain people in certain situations.

This is where the right to life, freedom of religion and health care stand in America today.

To narrowly and immediately preserve the freedom of conscience of some family business owners who managed to get their case all the way to the Supreme Court, a 5-4 "conservative" majority accepted the premise that an abortion is not an abortion and that the families' freedom of religion can be preserved if the health-insurance industry is forced into complicity with the taking of human lives — because that advances a compelling interest of our government.

http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/te...lobby-decision