Replies

Some of us are looking into a class action to provide an opt out for prolife people of faith. There is a sequence that could not only get us there, but could deal a body blow to the broader enforcement of Obamacare.

First problem with legislative cases is always standing. Generally, taxpayers don’t have it, because the individual impact of a given policy is viewed as too small an injury to upset the separation of the political and judicial domains. Don’t like a law, vote the bums out.

However, where the taxpayer is being coerced into establishing a specific religion against his will, and where such establishment is effectively grounded in the congressional power to tax, getting standing becomes much more likely.

Then the question becomes one of equal protection. If the Amish can opt out as conscientious objectors due to their moral disapproval of using non-church insurance, how much more does the prolifer have grounds for conscientious objection to having the government use their tax dollars to fund what they sincerely believe to be murder?

Now conscientious objection is not a path for the faint of heart. The court will look at the depth of one’s commitment to the principle espoused. A mere preference will not suffice; objection must be an unalterable conviction. For example, eating three meals a day is a preference. Breathing is a conviction. Those not willing to go to the wall for the unborn should not be plaintiffs in this case.

Nevertheless, if we could get this to fly, think of the implications. Over half the country is professedly prolife. If some case like this serves as the tip of the spear, and we can get break open an opt out for half the country, it could fatally hemorrhage Obamacare funding, and all quite legally.

I am building a list of people who would be interested in pursuing this route, so feel free to contact me if you are interested.