There's Another Supreme Court challenge to Obamacare contraception mandate

American Thinker ^ | 11/06/2015 | Rick Moran

[SeekAndFind]

For the fourth time, Obamacare is going before the Supreme Court, this time to decide if forcing religious nonprofit groups to provide contraception against their beliefs is constitutional.

Politico:

The case represents yet another trip for the Affordable Care Act before the justices since the law's passage more than five years ago — and this one could represent another Obamacare-Supreme Court flash point in an election year. But unlike some of the earlier Obamacare challenges, a ruling against the administration would not cripple the legislation. The law's major provisions, such as the health insurance exchanges, the subsidies and Medicaid expansion, would be unaffected.

The justices combined seven similar cases from groups that include the Little Sisters of the Poor, an order of Roman Catholic nuns that runs nursing homes. Their lawsuit has received the most media attention of any of the birth control cases.

By accepting so many of the challenges, the court is giving a significant amount of attention to the case.

The challenge is very similar to the Hobby Lobby case the Supreme Court heard in 2014. The justices ruled last year that the law’s contraception coverage requirement violated for-profit businesses’ rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. This suit, however, deals with how groups with some religious ties — such as Catholic service groups or evangelical colleges — have to comply with the birth control rule.

This would appear to be a no-brainer, except that's the problem with the Obama administration and at least four Supreme Court justices when it comes to exempting religious groups from the contraception mandate.  What part of "religious freedom" don't they understand?

[Diogenesis]

Here SCOTUS met ex parte with the First undocumented Moslem
as they all agree America, as we knew it,
and its Constitution which they are unable to read, must die.

[RKBA Democrat]

We sure spend a lot of time and effort trying to curry favor with these robed putzes.

[Amendment10]

Thank you for referencing that article SeekAndFind. Please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.

Regarding another Supreme Court challenge to Obamacare, are there still patriots out there who are expecting lawless Obamas activist majority justices to admit a constitutional problem with unconstitutional Obamacare?

As mentioned in related threads, the corrupt majority justices who wrongly gave the green light to Obamacare surely do not want voters to find out that the justices blatantly ignored the following. The justices ignored that previous generations of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that the states never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for anything like Obamacare. This is evidenced by the excerpts below from Supreme Court case opinions.

Regarding the Obamacare insurance mandate for example, please consider the fourth excerpt in the list from Paul v. Virginia. That excerpt indicates that the Court had previously clarified that insurance policies are contracts, not commerce, regardless if the parties negotiating the contract are domeciled in different states. Congress therefore has no Commerce Clause power to regulate INTRAstate insurance of any kind, the Obamacare insurance mandate therefore unconstitutional.

• ”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress. [emphases added]” Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.

• ”Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.

• ”Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description [emphasis added], as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass.” Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln., 1837.

• ” 4. The issuing of a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce [emphasis added] within the meaning of the latter of the two clauses, even though the parties be domiciled in different States, but is a simple contract of indemnity against loss.” Paul v. Virginia, 1869. (The corrupt feds have no Commerce Clause (1.8.3) power to regulate insurance.)

• ”Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously [emphases added] beyond the power of Congress.” Linder v. United States, 1925.

Note that former Representative Jessie Jackson Jr. had responsibly repeatedly initiated the process for proposing a constitutional Article V amendment to the Constitution for healthcare. But the House under former Speaker Pelosi evidently ignored the resolution, also wrongly ignoring the required consent of the Article V state majority before establishing Obamacare by doing so.

"Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States regarding the right of citizens of the United States to health care of equal high quality.” H. J. Res. 30.

Also consider that we cannot blame unconstitutional Obamacare entirely on Obama and activist justices. In fact, concerns about the constitutionality of Obamacare should never have made it to the Supreme Court imo.

More specifically, the Senate did not protect the interests of the states in Congress as the Founding States had estalished the Senate to do. In this case the corrupt, post-17th Amendment ratification Senate did not kill the Obamacare bill as it should have, that bill stealing not only 10th Amendment-protected state powers to regulate healthcare, but also stealing state revenues uniquely associated with those powers.

The ill-conceived 17th Amendment needs to disappear, and corrupt senators who help the likewise corrupt House to pass unconstitutional appropriations bills, such as the one that established Obamacare, along with it.