Posted on 11/07/2015 7:49:53 AM PST by NYer
Justices will give the Little Sisters of the Poor their day in court
The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear a challenge from religious organizations who say the government’s requirement that their health plans provide coverage for contraceptives violates their religious beliefs.
The high court ruled last year, in the Hobby Lobby case, that the Health and Human Services contraception mandate violates for-profit businesses’ rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. But the new challenge examines how religious-operated groups, such as the Little Sisters of the Poor and some colleges and dioceses, who employ lay people, have to comply with the contraception mandate.
The Obama administration crafted an indirect way for religious groups that do not automatically get an exemption, such as churches, to provide coverage: They have to inform their insurer of their objection, and the insurer has to provide the coverage directly and its own expense.
Objectors insist that doing so, even through an act as simple as writing a letter to the Health and Human Services Department, would involve them in the mechanism to the point that they would be, according to Catholic moral theology, complicit in the provision of contraception.
In the first place, they say, signing a form or writing a letter would be a “trigger” that sets the process of providing contraceptives in motion.
“All the available compliance methods would make them morally complicit in grave sin,†said a brief filed with the Supreme Court earlier this year by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
According to Politico, the high court had eight petitions on this issue. “There are also conflicting rules between the circuit courts: four appeals panels ruled for the Obama administration. But one, the 8th Circuit in St. Louis, sided with the religious groups,” the news outlet said. “The court is likely to hear the challenge in the spring and issue a ruling before the end of its term in June.”
The Becket Fund, a law firm specializing in religious liberty cases, says one of the clients they are representing in the case, the Little Sisters of the Poor, face “tens of millions of dollars in IRS fines because they cannot, according to their faith, include contraceptives in their employee health plan.â€
“The Court’s decision will finally resolve the crucial question of whether governmental agencies can, wholly without legislative oversight, needlessly force religious ministries to violate their faith,†the Becket Fund said in a statement.
Learning the news this afternoon, Helen M. Alvare, a former spokeswoman for the United States Bishops Conference who has been leading an effort against the HHS mandate, told Aleteia, “This is going to be a make-or-break year for women to express both their solidarity with religious freedom, for all of the reasons religious freedom is essential to human freedom…but also because, in the case of the HHS Mandate…because the religious actors here really know the meaning of women’s freedom.”
The Supreme Court has consolidated the Sisters’ case with other Becket clients, such as Priests for Life, the Archdiocese of Washington and the Diocese of Pittsburgh. “It is ridiculous for the federal government to claim, in this day and age, that it can’t figure out how to distribute contraceptives without involving nuns and their health plans.†said Senior Counsel Mark Rienzi.
He added that the government should not be allowed to say that the Sisters “aren’t ‘religious enough’ to merit the exemption that churches and other religious ministries have received.
A Becket Fund statement explained the Sisters’ objection:
The Little Sisters, who care for more than 13,000 of the elderly poor  in the U.S., had no choice but to appeal to the Supreme Court due to the government’s refusal to exempt them from the HHS mandate, which is currently in its 9th unacceptable iteration. The mandate forces the Little Sisters to authorize the government to use the Sister’s employee healthcare plan to provide contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs – a violation of their faith –  or pay massive fines, which would threaten their religious mission (watch video). The Supreme Court entered a temporary order protecting the nuns in January, 2014, but the government has continued litigating, asking lower courts to remove that protection.
Plaintiffs, including Thomas Aquinas College in California, have already encountered opposition like that of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which ruled against the challengers last November. Writing for a unanimous three-judge panel, Judge Cornelia T. L. Pillard opined that the accommodation did not impose a substantial burden.
“All plaintiffs must do to opt out is express what they believe and seek what they want via a letter or two-page form,†she wrote. “That bit of paperwork is more straightforward and minimal than many that are staples of nonprofit organizations’ compliance with law in the modern administrative state.â€
Catholic ping!
Have no fear. Roberts will simply re-write the law again for the third time and everything will be ok.
Oh-—isn’t that so sweet-—to have the fascist SCOTUS be able to declare whether we have a US Constitution—a First Amendment and FREEDOM from tyranny and control, as the document states— this persecution of nuns is fascism and evil Nuremberg “law”. Every good, thinking person knows this.
SCOTUS is playing “God” again and will probably keep OUT God and Reason like in our current Vice System.
This is no “Justice” System-—it is a complete SHAM-—like Nuremberg in the 30s and early 40s. USA Constitution IS the Supreme Law of the Land-—not this evil oligarchy.
This “legal” system (so-called “Justice” system) is like in Tesla’s Days with JP Morgan-—the wealthy controls the “ruling” of the bribed judges which is SO unconstitutional-—they recreate meanings for Words (LOL) to make Words meaningless or the OPPOSITE of what they mean (which removes Right Reason from Just Law). Can’t do that——but they DID!!!!!! AND got away with it!!!!!!! AND made laws that allow KILLING BABIES-—they did that decades ago-—AND THEY ALLOWED IT TO STAND!!!!!!!! AS they do Mengele baby-killing, baby-selling warehouses. AND IT IS JUST LAW!!!!!!!LOL
Destroy meaning of Words—like in “just” law and marriage—and you have irrational and insane law-—can’t be Constitutional.
SCOTUS 5 need to be in prison for Treason and ignoring their oaths.
How come we put up with this irrational fascism—that has cost people millions of dollars and makes the judges and lawyers filthy wealthy stealing money from organizations that have actually EARNED the money.
The Leviathan (Legal System) is no longer promoting Just Law, so all those evil, unjust, unequal, “special rights for evil behaviors” laws need to be declared “Null and Void” like Justice Marshall EXPLAINED when he stated that ALL Just Law had to promote “public virtue” and be “equal” (using REASON and CHRISTIAN ETHICS (God’s Laws) only—not Satan’s or Stalin’s ethics).
Given that SCOTUS supported Hobby Lobby, I think this one will probably go the right way.
Roberts has corrupted Constitutional jurisprudence to avoid striking down or making unworkable the whole Obamacare law. The contraceptive mandate (and the demand that the Little Sisters of the Poor offer a grain of incense to the Imperial Standards by signing a paper authorizing someone else to commit what they see as a mortal sin) are part of the “as the Secretary shall direct” regulations that HHS promulgated, and as was done in the Hobby Lobby case can be struck down on First Amendment grounds without striking down or gutting the (jury-rigged) functionality of the law.
SCOTUS covered up Obama’s Indonesian background,
and lied about what ObamaCARE said.
They cannot be trusted and should be impeached
or America will die by their hands.
Catholic nuns have to fight for their religious rights, but islamists are exempt from the Obamacare Tyranny? Do I understand this correctly?
He’ll probably find that they are practicing medicine without a license and have them imprisoned at Gitmo.
Yes. They don't provide outreach services to the poorest of the poor, like the Little Sisters.
We know how seven of nine justices will vote.
This evil application of an evil law is a blatant violation of the First Amendment and Thomas, Scalia, and Alito will find it unconstitutional. This is a liberal step toward far-left totalitarian rule, so Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Breyer, and Kagan will cheer for big government.
The only mysteries are Justices Roberts and Kennedy. Will Roberts be blackmailed again? What kind of mood will Kennedy be in? Freedom rests on an unfortunate pair of delicate questions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.