Posted on 06/30/2014 7:56:54 AM PDT by Enlightened1
This is not a victory as far as I am concerned because there were four Justices that actually voted against that. Each of those four is an enemy to our Constitution and our Republic.
What I found interesting is that there was almost no discussion about the “union-busting” case; which, in pragmatic terms might have a broader long-term affect (win the battle that might lead to winning the war...).
“Does this apply to all cases — EWTN, other religious organizations that protested this provision”
Yes for those 4 particular abortion causing drugs, but not over the counter contraceptions. Little Sisters of the Poor and EWTN still have to provide birth control pills for their employees if they want them. And so does Hobby Lobby, but they were already giving employees birth control pills, so go figure.
Yes, he would like to do that but it is difficult given the restrictions that the SCOTUS put on mandating medicaid expansion
It is possible that a judge might use this case (in general, the issue of something objectionable being offered) as a reason to allow them NOT to offer contraceptives.
The fact it is a narrow ruling is bad. The SCOTUS should have upheld what HOBBY LOBBY on the Freedom of Religion of the Constitution...
Has Harry Reid’s morman church called him out on his pro-abortion, pro queer “marriage” views? I guarantee you he’s a big shot Joseph Smith’s cult. Last time I checked the morman church was against queer “marriage” and abortion on demand.
Restrictions don’t mean much to this tyrant. As we’ve seen too many times he has a phone and a pen and just does what he wants.
Quite frankly, he doesn’t have anything to fear. The congress is impotent, nothing but vacuous talk with no action.
Are you saying the ACA is 100% in compliance with the Constitution? LOL! Again... I don't understand your point???
All it takes is just a crack to invalidate it. I don't understand how you think this will not create a Tidal Wave of new lawsuits.
The S.C. has considered a part of the law invalid. Well actually two parts with the other ruling. Size does not matter because it's all part of the same package/law.
At this point what has to be done is that it has to be modified in congress to meet the S.C. standards, voted and then signed by the President or it's no more.
Yes it's just that simple. A law has to meet constitional standards or it's NULL and VOID.
Many laws everyday are found invalid over a little tinny parts of it. It happens often.
So much of what the sheeple were told by the Media about Obama and Radical Dem Policies has turned out to be wrong and Unconstitutional.
And yet, the followers, especially the Low-Info’s, STILL won’t admit they might have been wrong.
The TV hasn’t told them it’s OK yet, and they don’t want to get kicked out of the “popular kids” club, after all....
As I understand the legal “dance”, that’s how things are interpreted, er, well, used to be (there’s not even any semblance of logic any more so who knows).
If Congress says in its law that it’s “all or nothing”, and if SCOTUS strikes down any point, then, yes, in theory the whole thing is nullified in a practical sense. Cuz everyone used to know that then Federal judges would then rule according to that SCOTUS “strike down”, so anything in the law could be successfully challenged. Most times, therefore, Congress would choose to be sure to indicate that it was NOT all or nothing, so they would keep the parts not struck down.
Today, in an era where the executive branch publicly states that they will not enforce laws according to their whim, Congress is more useless (except to the financial elites) than it ever was and judges legislate at their whim - all bets are off from a courtroom perspective. We live in a legally arbitrary society at this point.
Many sheeple still are not quite catching on that the financial elites are the worst war-criminal, drug lord slavers in history and that they form the top of the hierarchy of the American establishment. In effect, the worst criminals of all, criminals on a global scale, rule over our government, which is just a show put on for us sheeple.
More sheeple are catching on every day.
The first thing is to admit there’s a problem, second is to correctly identify what the problem is. We’re slowly getting there.
Actually doing something about it is quite another story, of course.
I doubt that Obama will be the least bit upset about it as he may not be able to get the news on the seventh green.
He will continue to rule as a dictator until someone stops him.
I rarely click on links to the DUmp, but I checked that one out.
Liberalism is certainly a mental disorder.
Good news!
Who voted against it?
He’s going to quadruple funding for Planned Parenthood which has been providing contraceptives and abortions for years. Even our schools pass out contraceptives.
If a small part of a law is found unconstitutional, then the law has to be modified, by congress and signed by the President, in order to meet the Constitutional standards set by the Supreme Court.
If nothing happens, then the entire law becomes null and void. It also opens up new law suits.
O$hithead can’t overturn it, but we have seen where he will simply ignore it, in which case, Hobby Lobby can tell him to stick it!
ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, and THOMAS ,JJ., joined. KENNEDY, J., filed a concurring opinion.GINSBURG, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined, and in which BREYER and KAGAN , JJ., joined as to all but Part III–C–1. BREYER and KAGAN, JJ., filed a dissenting opinion.
Basically, 5-4 decision with Alito writing the decision for the Majority of Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas.
The dissenting opinion was written by Sotomayor, joined by Sotomayor, Breyer, and Kagan. But Breyer and Kagan did not agree with all parts of the dissenting opinion...
The real issue is....get rid of Abortion....Period. The idea that every woman has the right to kill is absurd.
I don’t know as of yet. My guess is that it’s the usual suspects.
Darth Fader Ginsburg is about to pop, but hopefully outside the next election. However, she will retire so that Pres dip$hit can appoint a new libtard.
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.