- John McCain: Botched, two-hour execution of murderer is ‘torture’
- House GOP ready to move border bill
- Bomb squad called after live WWII artillery washes on Cape Cod beach
- HAYDEN: Intelligence, evidence and the case against Russia
- Ohio university quiz implies atheists are naturally smarter than Christians
- Rep. Henry Cuellar on border crisis: ‘Playing defense on the one-yard line’
- Activists vow to occupy fast-food restaurants to get higher pay
- Rep. Luis Gutierrez: Senate Dems wary of immigration politics
- Summer camp for 1 percenters: Sushi, limos and shopping at FAO Schwarz
- Colorado gun crackdown law found to be built on faulty data
Second court backs Obama birth control mandate
Cases could end in Supreme Court
Question of the Day
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday sided with the Obama administration in the nationwide legal battle over the mandate to cover contraception services, marking the second time a federal appeals court rebuffed a company that argued the mandatory coverage of birth control violates its religious beliefs.
A third court, seated in Denver, took an opposing view in July when it granted the Hobby Lobby crafts franchise an injunction that shields the Oklahoma City company from the rule tied to the Affordable Care Act until the merits of their case can be heard.
Taken together, the split rulings indicate that the matter is headed for the highest court in the land.
Judges on the 6th Circuit, seated in Cincinnati, said Tuesday that a Michigan-based manufacturing company named Autocam must comply with the mandate even though it would violate the owners’ Roman Catholic beliefs.
John Kennedy, president of Autocam, and other plaintiffs who sued over the mandate, said the Obama administration’s rule required them to choose among violating their beliefs, dropping Autocam employees’ health care coverage or facing massive fines for flouting the mandate.
Conservative lawmakers and religious groups have lobbied the Obama administration and Congress to provide a religious exemption from the mandate, citing particular objections to morning-after pills that they equate with abortion.
Supporters of the mandate say contraception use is widespread and at times unaffordable for many women. They argue that corporate owners are not entitled to impose their personal beliefs on the diverse array of people they employ at secular companies by stripping contraception coverage from their health care plans.
“The Kennedys’ actions with respect to Autocam are not actions taken in an individual capacity, but as officers and directors of the corporation,” the 6th Circuit panel wrote.
The judges said they agreed with government attorneys who argued “that Autocam has not carried its burden of demonstrating a strong likelihood of success on the merits in this action.”
The American Civil Liberties Union hailed the ruling.
“Religious liberty is a fundamental right, but for-profit companies cannot invoke religious beliefs to deny their employees benefits,” ACLU senior staff attorney Brigitte Amiri said.
Houses of worship are exempt from the contraception mandate, and religious nonprofits have been extended an “accommodation” that would divorce corporate owners from managing or paying for their employees’ contraception coverage.
But corporations were not granted any form of relief from the requirement.
In late July, about a week after Hobby Lobby’s successful plea to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, judges on the 3rd Circuit said a Pennsylvania-based company, Conestoga Wood Specialties, had to comply with the mandate.
A decision tracker at the Becket Fund said 29 companies have secured an injunction against the mandate at either the district or circuit court level, while five firms, including Conestoga and Autocam, have been denied relief.
“I can’t imagine that the United States [government] will just acquiesce in that,” Mr. Duncan said, given the case’s impact in the states covered by the 10th Circuit.
On Tuesday, a federal district court judge in Colorado cited the Hobby Lobby decision at length in an order that shielded former Sen. Bill Armstrong’s mortgage company from the mandate.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Tom Howell Jr. covers politics for The Washington Times. He can be reached at email@example.com.
- House panel OKs resolution to sue president for Obamacare delays
- Contrasting judgments on Obama's health care hours apart; appeals court calls subsidies unlawful
- New Democratic caucus will pressure GOP governors to expand Medicaid
- Insurers cough up refunds to subscribers under Obamacare ‘80-20 rule’
- GOP outraged Obamacare investigators able to get coverage with fake IDs
Latest Blog Entries
TWT Video Picks
Second- and third-stringers eye 2016 if front-runner stumbles
- Michelle Obama says money in politics is bad, asks donors for 'big, fat check'
- 'We're coming for you, Barack Obama': Top U.S. official discloses threat from ISIL terrorists
- Presidents of Honduras, Guatemala blame U.S. for border children crisis
- NAPOLITANO: What if our democracy is a fraud?
- EDITORIAL: Detroit's water 'spigot bigots'
- PRUDEN: The Democratic-wannabe mice under Hillary Clinton's feet
- Let it roll: D.C. Council hits Las Vegas on taxpayer's dime, leaves $14,000 tab
- White House readies for House GOP impeachment push: 'Foolish' to ignore
- Hamas rejects Kerry's call for cease-fire; Fears grow others could join fight against Israel
- Brian Kelly, Notre Dame ready for different route to title
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world
Fighting in Iraq