Lawsuits against a federal regulation continue to be filed and are at various stages of litigation and appeal. The contested regulation requires employers of 50 or more people to provide health insurance coverage for contraceptives, embryocides and surgical sterilization, even if the employers object to the services for reasons of concience. As a result of the lawsuits and widespread protests, the Obama
administration has proposed amendments to the regulation, which have been rejected as unsatisfactory by its opponents (New York Times). Judges are split on the issue. (Los Angeles Times) (For a map and up-to-date overview of lawsuits filed against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, see the Becket Fund’s
HHS Information Central.
Tag: HHS preventive services mandate (USA)
Proposed Amendment to HHS Regulation
Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act
Introduction:
The Obama administration has decided that, as a matter of public policy, individual women should not have to pay for “FDA approved contraceptive services,” which include surgical sterilization, contraceptives, and embryocides. The reasons offered for this policy are mainly economic and socio-political.
A regulation was written by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for this purpose. The regulation requires all group health care plans (the kind of plan usually offered by businesses or oganizations) to offer coverage and fully pay for “preventive services” identified in Section 147.130 (reproduced below, in part). Businesses with 50 or more employees must offer such coverage by 2014, or face penalties. Health insurance issuers (like insurance companies) must also make available group and individual plans that fully pay for “preventive services.”
The regulation sparked widespread protests and opposition from religious groups and, as of February, 2013, had generated 47 lawsuits launched by over 130 plaintiffs. 11 of 14 federal courts hearing the suits issued temporary injunctions to protect plaintiffs against the regulation.
In response, the Obama administration has issued proposed amendments to the regulation.
Update on American HHS birth control mandate controversy: January, 2013
The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) has filed a lawsuit against the regulation on behalf of two Ohio companies [Lifenews]. A U.S. District Judge has dismissed suits filed by the Archdiocese of Washington and four other Catholic nonprofit groups on the grounds that the suits are premature [Bloomberg] Lawsuits filed by Colorado Christian University and Notre Dame University in Indiana have also been dismissed [The Coloradoan; First Things]. The Catholic diocese of Nashville, Tennessee and seven other groups in the state are appealing a lower court ruling against them[The Tennessean]. In Illinois, a temporary injunction has been granted against state legislation that is similar to the HHS regulation because the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act and Health Care Right of Conscience Act [Georgia Bulletin]. However, the U.S. federal government is appealing a decision to grant a temporary injunction against the HHS regulation to Tyndale House Publishers Inc. of Illinois [Bloomberg].A temporary injunction against the HHS regulation has been granted to a Missouri company, Sharpe Holdings Inc., the third such injunction granted in the state [St. Louis Beacon]. Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli attracted criticism because of his remarks to the effect that the nature of the HHS regulation will only become apparent if people go to jail for refusing to obey it [Reason.com]
For a map and up-to-date overview of lawsuits filed against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, see the Becket Fund’s HHS Information Central.
Obama ‘freedom to worship’ assaults First Amendment
Freedom of religion not just for private expression
28 January, 2013
Washington Times
President Obama marked Religious Freedom Day earlier this month by framing religious liberty as “the freedom to worship as we choose.” If the president had not been restricting and attacking religious freedom so egregiously, he might merit a pass for using “freedom to worship” as poor shorthand for religious liberty.
The First Amendment of our Constitution actually reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The constitutionally guaranteed free exercise of religion in America extends well beyond the freedom to worship. It includes the freedom to live out our conscientiously held beliefs. . . [Read on]
Update on American HHS birth control mandate controversy
On 14 December, Tom Monaghan, the founder of Domino’s Pizza, filed a lawsuit against the HHS regulation [Associated Press]. Five days later, a federal appeals court reinstated lawsuits filed by Wheaton College and Belmont Abbey that had been dismissed by a lower court. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals also ordered the Obama administration to report every sixty days on its progress in redrafting the regulation to accommodate employers with religious objections to providing insurance for birth control.[Life News] News of the Wheaton and Belmont decisions came too late for inclusion in a column in the New England Journal of Medicine, which outlined the litigation and the issues.The federal Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court ruling that Hobby Lobby must comply with the mandate because it does not impose a “substantial burden” on the exercise of freedom of religion by the company’s owner. [The Hill] In contrast, O’Brien Industrial Holdings of Missouri was granted an injunction by an appeals court that prohibits the federal government from enforcing the regulation. The decision overturns a lower court ruling [The Foundry, 3 December]. A similar injunction was granted to the Griesedieck family‘s American Pulverizer Company in Minnesota [National Review] Commenting that there is no “trust us changes are coming” clause in the U.S. Constitution, a federal judge in New York upheld the right of the Catholic Archdiocese of New York to proceed with its lawsuit against the mandate. [Becket Fund, 6 December] Meanwhile, the Little Sisters of the Poor, a Catholic religious order that provides nursing care to the elderly poor in 30 American cities, is considering the possiblity of leaving the United States if the current regulation stands. [LifeSite News]