U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued an injunction against the U.S. federal government preventing it from enforcing a controversial regulation that would require Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged, a Catholic organization, to authorize their insurance company to provide coverage for contraceptives and surgical sterilization for their employees. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit also issued an emergency stay for Catholic-affiliated groups challenging the contraceptive provision.[USA Today] Meanwhile, the President of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops wrote to President Obama asking that enforcement of the regulation be suspended until the Supreme Court has ruled on the issue in two cases it has agreed to hear.[USCCB]
Category: Contraception
Texas court grants injunction against federal mandate
A federal court in Houston, Texas, has granted an injunction to East Texas Baptist University and Houston Baptist University to prevent the enforcement of a controversial federal regulation that forces objecting employers to provide health insurance for birth control and surgical sterilization. The Universities argued that their religious freedom was unlawfully infringed by the regulation. [LifeNews]
Catholic Archdiocese of New York wins injunction
A federal court in New York has awarded the Catholic Archdiocese of New York a permanent injunction barring enforcement of the contentious federal regulation that requires objecting employers to pay for health insurance for contraception and surgical sterilization. The federal government can appeal the ruling. [New York Times]
U.S. Supreme Court to hear appeal on federal birth control mandate
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases concerning the controversial federal regulation that compels businesses employing more than 50 people to provide health insurance for birth control and surgical sterilization, even if the business owners object to doing so for reasons of conscience. In one case (Hobby Lobby) the lower court supported the plaintiff’s position; in the other (Conestoga Wood Specialties) the lower court supported the federal government. [Washington Post]
Philippines government demands referral by objecting physicians even if not “right”
In the closing hearings into the controversial Reproductive Health Law, judges of the Philippines Supreme Court questioned a provision in the law that makes it a crime to provide “incorrect information” about contraceptives. When Senior State Solicitor Florin Hilbay explained that the Philippines Food and Drug Administration will determine what is “correct,” a judge pointed out that this would mean that no dissent from that would be allowed. Another judge raised the possibility of the imprisonment of physicians who disagree with the FDA about the safety of a drug.
Hilbay also claimed that objecting physicians have a “professional obligation” to facilitate the provision of the services to which they object by referral, asserting that refusal to refer makes a patient a “victim.” He insisted on this even though he admitted that referral might not be “right.” The court gave lawyers for both sides 60 days to submit memoranda concerning their arguments. [Manila Standard] [Philippine Daily Inquirer] [Inquirer.net]