This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Supreme Court Gives Obamacare Opponents Biggest Legal Victory Yet
Moments ago the US Supreme Court - the same Supreme Court which two years ago upheld Obamacare but as a tax, something the administration has since sternly denied - dealt Obamacare its biggest legal blow to date, and alternatively handing Obamacare opponents their largest court victory yet, when in a 5-4 vote SCOTUS ruled that business owners can object on religious grounds to a provision of President Barack Obama's healthcare law that requires closely held private companies to provide health insurance that covers birth control.
As Reuters notes, the justices ruled for the first time that for-profit companies can make claims under a 1993 federal law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). One of the two cases was brought by arts-and-crafts retailer Hobby Lobby Stores Ltd, which is owned and operated by David and Barbara Green and their children, who are evangelical Christians. The other case was brought by Norman and Elizabeth Hahn, Mennonites who own Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp in Pennsylvania. The justices said that such companies can seek an exemption from the so-called birth control mandate. The decision, which applies only to companies owned by a small number of individuals, means employees of those companies will have to obtain certain forms of birth control from other sources.
As expected, the Supreme Court, which is nothing but a gaggle of political activists, voted along ideological lines. As Reuters reports, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a dissenting opinion on behalf of the liberal wing of the court.
"In a decision of startling breadth, the court holds that commercial enterprises, including corporations, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, can opt out of any law ... they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs," she wrote.
Americans, clearly having nothing better to worry about, promptly made their way to the SCOTUS building:
Hundreds of demonstrators on both side of one of the most contentious cases of the Supreme Court term converged on the court building, wearing costumes, chanting and carrying signs. Some demonstrators chanted, "Keep your boardroom out of my bedroom" and "Separate church and state, women must decide their fate." Signs carried by demonstrators offered contrasting views: "Obamacare - religious liberty First Amendment outlawed," "I am the pro-life generation," and "Birth control not my boss's business." One man dressed up as a copy of the Bible, brandishing a sign saying, "Use me not for your bigotry."
But while the impact on US healthcare from this ruling will be modest, the real consequence will be in Washington, where as Politico writes, "So much for the Obamacare comeback."
Just when the health care law seemed to be in a better place, with a big finish to the enrollment season and the early embarrassments fading into the background, the Supreme Court handed Obamacare’s opponents their biggest legal victory yet.
The contraception coverage mandate isn’t central to the law, the way the individual mandate is. By letting some closely held employers — like family-owned businesses — opt out of the coverage if they have religious objections, the justices haven’t blown a hole in the law that unravels its ability to cover millions of Americans. They didn’t even overturn the contraception coverage rule itself. They just carved out an exemption for some employers from one benefit, one that wasn’t even spelled out when the law was passed.
But politically, that doesn’t matter.
What matters is that the Supreme Court has ruled that the Obama administration overreached on one of the most sensitive cultural controversies in modern politics. And in doing so, the justices have given the Affordable Care Act one more setback that it didn’t need heading into the mid-term elections.
“This will remind people why they don’t like the ACA to begin with,” said Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway. “People do not believe that a president, no matter what party they’re from, should be overbearing or intrusive into their religious practices.”
Republican ad maker Brad Todd put it bluntly: “Anytime Obamacare is in the news, it’s a good thing for Republicans.”
The ruling also allows Republicans to say that Obama and his law have violated one of the most respected constitutional protections: freedom of religion.
“They’ve overreached, and they’ve overreached in an area that’s very sacred,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List.
That's great. However, it presupposes that Americans still care about such trivial items as freedom (of any kind). And, of course, the Constitution. Both are up for debate.
»
- 13886 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
It's still free to swallow.
Besides, with the state of Family Courts in the USA, any man who continues to play American Roulette and do a live fire in the Vajayjay is nuts.
+1 for "live fire in the Vajayjay"!
Moewhah, You stupid A.....
If I convert to a religion that does not believe in healthcare at all, can I be exempted from the law altogether?
Technically, yes.
http://www.religionnews.com/2014/04/28/obamacare-religious-exemption-har...
1950 predates scientology.
I went into Hobby Lobby once with my small backpack. I was stopped at the entrance and told that I couldn't walk into the store and I needed to leave my pack behind.
I told the guy 'fuck you' and walked out.
The woman who killed two cops and a civilian in Las Vegas worked for Hobby Lobby.
Most small retail stores have the same rule about bringing in backpacks and other outside bags. They can't afford the anti-theft technology (cameras, RFID tags) that Walmart or Target uses.
I too have been in stores that carry a backpack. When the employee told me the rule, I politely gave them my backpack to hold while i was shopping.
Is the only point of this post to let us all know what a rude person you are?
These comments aren't controversial enough.
Does this mean employers are still covering obamacare taxfunded abortions?
Pretty stupid for companies not to ok birth control pills. I hope every female employee gets pregnant and takes a bunch of paid leave. Then has to stay home with sick kids taking even more time off. Rock on, morons.
That, or chose to work for a different retail business that doesn't run on ideology. Maybe even Hobby Lobby's competition.
How many employees does your business have, and do you pay for their birth control? Yeah, I thought so.
Do I also have to be a property owner.
This is what I do to forget that we have Obama as our president.. www.fishgaak.com
He is like a never ending nightmare
We're talking about a closely held company with a few shareholders.
Not Fortune 500 companies.
Leave the little guy the fuck alone, big government trolls!
Apparently you haven't seen the closely held (94th richest person in USSA) David Green's spread.
http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/david-greens-house-1/view/?service=0
Jeezus, what's with the epidemic of downvotes ?
Downvotes with no retorts. Typical progressive cowards.
"Downvotes with no retorts. Typical progressive cowards."
I downvoted and retorted and you just snorted.
Two rulings against POTUS in days?
Wonder which motive is behind this most recent change of sentiment, blackmail or intimidation?
Against him? Puh-lease...this is a set up to try and get rid of representative government and the gridlock it causes. To move "forward" we will need to eliminate gridlock and, thus, the 3 co-equal branches system of government.
NOTHING goes against the State. This was a planned outcome.
Finally somebody who gets it. It is all too convenient how there is always a "swing vote" on SCOTUS which gives each side a "win" every once in a while to keep down rebellion. Every time a decision is handed down the losing side is always screaming about activist judges and they are too stupid to realize they are all being played.
Omergawsh, izz maniperlated?!
Supreme Court full of assine dinosaurs ... yes you scalia, alito et al. Pitchforks will surely appear at some point as even the billionaires now realize
An SC Justice (ret) was being interviewed and he said looking back over his decisions he would have voted some differently now. So it's all a crap shoot.
Yeah, funny how that works. Once they leave office, pols and "justices" spill the beans on everything and everyone they thought was wrong. Why the hell didn't they do it when they were in office? Never mind, already know the answer...
I thought the answer was he had changed his opinion. And you don't know what opinions they were. He may have thought the Red was right but they proved him wrong.
Corinthians 6:19 - " Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20 you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies."
I should not have to provide coverage to smokers and obese folks for related illnesses as they have defiled their bodies against God's will.
Narcissist Barry is not going to take all this rejection well. I expect full scorched earth policy from this point forward.
I thought the Supreme Court was the Supreme Court of the TOTUS. Dude's probably getting a heap of backlash from corporations at this point. YeeeeeHaaaa. Hussein doesn't control the entire Washington D.C. government at this point. Most likely it is because of funding and supplying weapons to Al-Queda and the Saudi threat to Israel. If I were that Manchurian candidate I'd quit and head back to Nigeria before it gets worse.
Will Big Pharma and Big Insurance like this ruling?
Christian jihadists declare caliphate! Religion, not government rules their lives like some other extremist we know.
The extremists always believe that their brand of religion is the ONLY ONE TRUE FAITH and that all others are apostates and hellbound. It should be fun watching the fire-insurance mummery play out, but only if the fanatics are the only ones getting burned.
"the court holds that commercial enterprises, including corporations, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, can opt out of any law "
Ginsburg truely is an idiot. Yea, you old bat it means exactly that: "Because some business owning taxpayers don't want to pay for something that violates their religion and should not have anything to do with insurance and/or employment benefits it means those same taxpayers now want to disobey all laws".
So I guess next time we have a declared war a group of Buddhists who believe in non-violence running a company can refuse to pay any Federal taxes on the grounds that they don't want to pay for war which violates their religious beliefs.
Why can't individuals op out? Do companies now haev more rights then the citizens of the country?
"Do companies now haev more rights then the citizens of the country?"
Yes they do. Lobbyists have seen to that.
well I would hope so but unless they're also in bed with the NSA, probably not happening.
Big whoop. How much do rubbers, IUDs, Diaphragms or a Snip cost?
Moral: Don't play if you can't pay.
p.s. If you think that birth control is 'expensive', wait till you have to pay for the consequences of not using it. Red pill, blue pill or RU486 pill? "Welcome to the real world."
Big whoop. How much do rubbers, IUDs, Diaphragms or a Snip cost?
Moral: Don't play if you can't pay.
Is that an endorsement for denying sexuality or pedophilia? Accidents, efficacy? Hell I know a woman who got pregnant after a snip, her husband subsequently dumped her only for him to find out his snip didn't take. It wasn't blanks he was shootin. He then tried to get her back & was told to go fuck himself for accusing her of cheating. The results of that botched snip was a fatherless child.Well that's why you're supposed to get tested to make sure it works.
So, he's dumb. Relevance to comments & story: none.
Isn't the issue not the 'religious belief' of the corporate entity, which is absurd, but the idea that people don't lose their 1st Amendment rights because they walk in the door of a corporation?
In any event, people are crying and stamping their feet so much about it at the NY Times, that I have to assume it was a good decision for those of us who don't necessarily equate more government coercion with more freedom.
Buy your shit at Rite Aid, you slut.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/01/us/supreme-court-ruling-in-contracepti...
Money shots are free.
I, for one, am willing to pay for Sandra Fluke's birthcontrol. We should all do what we can to prevent the shallow gene pool participants from reproducing.
At least Penis Pumps are still covered... *whew* that's one of the most sacred "closely held" religious beliefs. The American Taliban is on the rise.
schwing!!
LOL
Yes, that $463 Medicare charge is a cost well spent! Penile socialism.
"freedumb!" If you are against birth control.... FUCK YOU.
Fuck your stupid little CULT too.
Someone give that man a Nobel prize...and get one for yourself too.
Well no viagra for you folks either.
Today's other SCOTUS decision, that public unions cannot deduct mandatory dues from worker's paychecks, is a far more significant decision. This is what the unions fought to the death (almost literally) over in Wisconsin. Now it is the law nationwide, thanks to a 5-4 vote in the supreme court. Since the liberals have been enjoying decades of this sort of judicial fiat, in the form of decisions like Roe-v-Wade and Brown-vs-Board, I am sure they will aquiesce gracefully to today's ruling.
Too much anger here. It really doesn't matter in the grand scheme anyway. This sucker is going down regardless of whether Sandra spends her $8 on pills or jello shots. At best the needle moves right a smidge.
the ole "divide and conquer" playbook. . .
re-runs.
Yep, it's so easy. Like shouting "Tastes Great" in a bar in the 1970s.
Or not.
The U.S. legal system is a playground for up-and-coming professional liars, politicians, and the 1 percent.
Why should my boss pay for my condoms and dragon dildos, it's nothing to do with him (unless he's invited)
Ms. Ginzburg sez:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/health-care/ginsburg-radical-hobby-lobby-ruling-may-create-havoc-20140630
Well maybe Congress shouldn't be passing laws that 30% or 90% of the country judge incompatible with their sincerely held beliefs, religious or otherwise.
Blistered is how I would describe Ginsburg's mind with this rhetorical argument.
"opt out of any law … they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs."
So, today 5 men voted against women's health care ands sorry guys we women won't tolerate it. We vote and we vote in massive numbers when we get angry. We have to pay co-pays and for our prescription medications. We don't want free medication. We want equal health care. Also, remember many women need contraception for medical issues too and not just to prevent pregnancy. Someone you love may need birth control(mother, sister, daughter, girlfriend, wife).
"Also, remember many women need contraception for medical issues too and not just to prevent pregnancy".
Then the argument should be to have it recognized as such not gut the first amendment. If you are being prescribed birth control for some hormonal reason it is documented.
But we shouldn't be having this discussion period had congress not passed a clearly unconstitutional law this would not be an issue. Your healthcare is YOUR responsibility not mine or your employer. Now we have handed that responsibility over to the very jackasses that ruined it in the first place. And please spare us your straight from the WH war on women rhetoric.
Unbelievably idiotic!
Of course you want free medication. You want free everything. Buy your own bloody pills.
Sluts are Statists