... calling the administration's punitive steps against the religious institutions an "actual and well-founded fear" that is "looming and certain" much like "a speeding train that is coming towards plaintiffs."
He chided the administration as having had ample time to address the institutions' concerns already. And then Judge Cogan let forth with this:
"The First Amendment does not require citizens to accept assurances from the government that, if the government later determines it has made a misstep, it will take ameliorative action.
"There is no, 'Trust us, changes are coming' clause in the Constitution.
"To the contrary, the Bill of Rights itself, and the First Amendment in particular, reflect a degree of skepticism towards governmental self-restraint and self-correction."
New York, one of the country's largest archdioceses, has estimated it would incur upwards of $200 million in fines and penalties for not providing the required free coverage to the 9,000 employees covered by its insurance plans.
So concerned were church officials that they issued a special pre-election letter to all Catholics, as we wrote here. It didn't suggest support for any specific candidate but reminded congregants of the faith's moral precepts and urged them to vote their conscience.
Since those precepts oppose abortion, for instance, the choice was pretty clearly not the fellow forcing the church to fund such insurance coverage.
A puzzled Cardinal Dolan wrote to parishioners this week:
"Did you hear about the decision last week by U.S. District Court Judge Brian M. Cogan in the lawsuit brought by the Archdiocese of New York.......against the administration for the unconstitutional HHS mandate?
"You probably did not, as there seems to have been virtually no mention of the decision in favor of the archdiocese, by the way in any local newspaper or on television.
"As far as I can tell, and Ive looked rather carefully, there hasnt even been a story in the New York Times, which couldnt wait to publish an editorial this past October, admonishing the bishops, when a federal judge in Missouri found for the administration and dismissed a similar case brought by a private, for-profit, mining company."
Well, as a first step, at least now the Cardinal has our version to read and distribute.
Last year, when 42 Church-related organizations launched the biggest law offensive in U.S. history by filing suit against the HHS in all the federal courts simltaneously, the LSM didn’t even cover it. Now some of those suits are advancing successfully through the federal system, and -— as Andrew Malcolm notes -— nobody has reported on it even a week later.
I just put this up on FR to prevent it sinking out of sight down the Memory Hole forever.
You know, it’s like a Third World Country, except that the submissive press doesn’t even have to be threatened by the regime. They jump right into their harnesses like sled dogs, eager to do as they’re told, pausing only long enough to lick the Master’s hands.
Wow, that really is news, good news that was supressed. Even the WSJ was calling the church law suit against Obamacare a long shot.
so if ANY business takes a conscience objection to a provision of obamacare then that part is blue lined out.
it is going to become a death of a thousand cuts for obamacare.
Liberals have defeated the fourth amendment in the name of Homeland inSecurity. Now they want to conquer the first and second amendments. I pray judges don’t let them do this.