Bad Behavior: The latest on accusations of bad behavior in the Marshall County Jail

U.S. Supreme Court to Review ACA Provisions on Contraception Coverage

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

U.S. Supreme Court

WASHINGTON (CNN) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday accepted an Obamacare law appeal over contraception coverage.

The high-stakes fight over implementing parts of the troubled health care reform law will move to the Supreme Court in coming months, in a dispute involving coverage for contraceptives and “religious liberty.”

The justices agreed on Tuesday to review provisions in the Affordable Care Act requiring employers of a certain size to offer insurance coverage for birth control and other reproductive health services without a co-pay. At issue is whether private companies and non-profits can refuse on the claim it violates their religious beliefs.

Oral arguments would likely be held in March with a ruling by late June.

The four current petitions are among nearly 100 pending lawsuits filed in federal court, challenging the birth control coverage benefits in the “Obamacare” law championed by President Barack Obama.

The high court nearly two years ago upheld the key funding provision of the health care law, ruling 5-4 that most Americans would be required to purchase health insurance or pay a financial penalty — the so-called “individual mandate.” That provision is not before the courts in the current dispute.

The constitutional debate now shifts to the separate employer mandates and whether corporations and religious institutions themselves enjoy the same First Amendment rights as individuals.

Three federal appeals courts around the country have struck down the contraception coverage rule, while two other appeals courts have upheld it. That “circuit split” makes a Supreme Court review more likely.

Among the plaintiffs is Hobby Lobby, Inc. a nationwide chain of about 500 for-profit arts and crafts stores.

David Green and his family are the owners, and say their Christian beliefs clash with parts of the law’s mandates for comprehensive coverage. They say some of the drugs that would be provided prevent human embryos from being implanted in a woman’s womb, which the Greens equate to abortion.

The privately held company does not object to funding other forms of contraception — such as condoms and diaphragms — for their roughly 13,000 employees, which Hobby Lobby says represent a variety of faiths.

Companies that refuse to provide the coverage could be fined up to $1.3 million daily.

The Obama administration has been defending the law and federal officials say they have already created rules exempting certain nonprofits and religiously affiliated organizations from the contraceptives requirements. In those cases, women would receive coverage from another company at no cost.

The law’s supporters say the law does not require individual company owners to personally provide coverage they might object, but instead places that responsibility on the corporate entity.

A key issue for the justices will be interpreting the 1993 federal law known as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Can companies, churches, and universities be included, or do the protections apply only to “persons?”

Technical issues with the Obamacare government website’s rollout in recent weeks have led to complaints and criticism over the law’s implementation.

The pending cases are Liberty University v. Lew (13-306); Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (13-354); Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius (13-356); and Autocam Corp. v. Sebelius (13-482).

TM & © 2013 Cable News Network, Inc., a Time Warner Company. All rights reserved.


  • Wake Up

    The Bible says that it is a sin to divorce for any other reason than adultery (Matthew 5:32). If I am a Christian business owner, can I refuse to hire anyone that has been divorced for reasons other than adultery? Some Christian feel that blacks are the people that are marked for seeing Ham’s nakedness in Genesis 9:20. If I feel that is what the bible says, should I be allowed to not hire blacks? The list can go on detailing all the possible paths this could take if we allow corporations/business to have the right to operate according to the owner’s religious beliefs. I can’t wait to see what the Supreme Court does with this one!

    • putter

      Mr. Wake up , I have noticed over the past year your comments to people are very disrespect full ,to people who do not believe the way you do. ask god the for forgiveness.

  • J


    It’s amazing how much they care about you — right up until you’re born. Then they whine you’re a taker collecting that luxurious $100 or less a month in food stamps.

    Are they an equal-opportunity-employer? Surely they’re not refusing to hire people because of the employee’s political or religious stances that “clash” with their own beliefs.

    Providing the coverage is the law. Doesn’t the book you read suggest following the laws? You don’t have to agree with contraceptives to allow others to use them, just like those that don’t agree with your religious stance shouldn’t be able to disallow you from practicing it.

    We will continue to shop at one of the many other competing craft supply stores.

Comments are closed.