I think the law was written with a clause that allows the Obama administration to change the participation requirements as it sees fit.
- Allowing exemptions as they see fit based on political donations, religious belief, union affiliation, congressional district (firms in close race districts get extra allowances.)
(Not really, but that is how it seems to be operating.)
I’d like to see the clause where Obama’s allowed to rewrite the law unilaterally. In any case, this comes on the heels of a judge dismissing one lawsuit because Obama’s not done rewriting the law yet:
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/24b5a11e-759f-5a1e-923f-1db75bb30c8c.html
Excerpt:
U.S. District Judge John A. Ross dismissed the lawsuit Tuesday, saying it was premature because of the government’s intent to make changes in the law and because religious and nonprofit groups were given until August to comply.
“The challenged regulation is not sufficiently final for review,” Ross wrote. “Plaintiffs also lack standing to challenge the present regulatory requirement because they are not subject to that requirement ...”
Without a doubt it gave the the ability to be (unconstitutionally) arbitrary and capacious. When is someone going to call them out on that. So many things have been held up as unconstitutional due to being arbitrary and capacious. Except this law.
The separation of church and state sounds great to the leftists....until they get to control its impact.
Like race THE LAW should be blind to religion. When it is not - we should know we have a serious problem.
Color blind law is good.
Religious blind law is good also.