Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Supreme Court to Decide Obamacare Contraceptive-Abortifacient Mandate
Supreme Court to Decide Obamacare Contraceptive-Abortifacient Mandate
Apr 4, 2025 1:04 PM

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a pair of cases that challenge the HHS mandate requiring many panies to insure contraceptive and abortifacients. The Obama administration asked the high court to review the issue after a federal appeals court in Colorado found in favor of Hobby Lobby, an Oklahoma-based crafts franchise. The court bine the Hobby Lobby case with lesser-known case involving Conestoga, a pany that lost earlier bids for relief from the mandate.

If you haven’t been following the controversy, here’s what you need to know about the mandate:

What is this contraception mandate everyone keeps talking about?

As part of the universal health insurance reform passed in 2010 (often referred to as “Obamacare”), all group health plans must now provide—at no cost to the recipient—certain “preventive services.” The list of services includes sterilization, contraceptives, and abortifacient drugs.

If this mandate is from 2010, why are we talking about it in 2013?

On January 20, 2012, the Obama Administration announced that that it would not expand the exemption for this mandate to include religious schools, colleges, hospitals, and charitable service organizations. Instead, the Administration merely extended the deadline for religious groups who do not already fall within the existing narrow exemption so that they will have one more year ply or drop health care insurance coverage for their employees altogether and incur a hefty fine

Is there a religious exemption from the mandate? If so, who qualifies for the exemption?

According to theBecket Fund for Religious Liberty, there is a “religious employer” exemption from the mandate, but it is extremely narrow and will, in practice, cover very few religious employers. The exemption may cover certain churches and religious orders that inculcate religious values “as [their] purpose” and which primarily employ and serve those who share their faith.

Many religious organizations—including hospitals, charitable service organizations, and schools—cannot meet this definition. They will be forced to choose between covering drugs and services contrary to their religious beliefs or cease to offer health plans to their employees and incur substantial fines.

“Not even Jesus’ ministry would qualify for this exemption,” they note, “because He fed, healed, served, and taught non-Christians.”

Doesn’t the mandate only apply to religious organizations that receive federal funding?

No. The mandate applies to religious employers even if they receive no federal funding.

When did the government begin requiring employer-insurance programs to pay for contraceptives?

According to theBecket Fund, the trend toward state-mandated contraceptive coverage in employee health insurance plans began in the mid-1990s and was accelerated by the decision of Congress in 1998 to guarantee contraceptive coverage to employees of the federal government through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP).

After FEHBP—the largest employer-insurance benefits program in the country—set this precedent, the private sector followed suit, and state legislatures began to make such coverage mandatory.

Why is the federal government dictating that contraceptives should be covered by insurance?

In 2000, the EEOC issued an opinion stating that the refusal to cover contraceptives in an employee prescription health plan constituted gender discrimination in violation of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). That law was added by Congress in 1978 in response to a Supreme Court decision holding that an employer’s selective refusal to cover pregnancy-related disability was not sex discrimination within the meaning of Title VII, the primary federal law addressing employment discrimination.

As the Beckett Fund notes, “Although this opinion is not binding on federal courts, it is influential, since the EEOC is the government body charged with enforcing Title VII. This opinion led to many lawsuits against non-religious employers who refused to cover prescription contraceptives.” The federal district courts have split over the issue of whether the PDA requires employers to provide contraception, the only federal court of appeals to reach the issue held that the PDA did not include a contraceptive mandate.

But what about the First Amendment protections? Isn’t such a requirement inherently unconstitutional?

InEmployment Division v. Smith, the Supreme Court announced that the First Amendment’s free exercise clause “does not relieve an individual of the obligation ply with a ‘valid and neutral law of general applicability,'” simply because “the law proscribes (or prescribes) conduct that his religion prescribes (or proscribes).” According to the Becket Fund this means that the fact that an act infringes on the religious beliefs or regulates the religiously motivated policies of a religious institution does not necessarily make the law unconstitutional

Isn’t this just a Catholic issue?

No. Although the Catholic Church has been the most vocal opponent of the mandate, many Protestant, Jewish, and Muslims also oppose the mandate. In fact, several evangelical leaders have called onevangelicals to stand with Catholics in civil disobedience to this law.Additionally, 300 academics and religious leaders signed astatementby the Beckett Fund explaining why the mandate is“unacceptable.”

What is the Catholic Church’s position on contraception?

The Catholic Church has always opposed contraception. In response to the then newly invented birth control pill, Pope Paul VI issued the encyclical letterHumanae Vitae(“Human Life”), which reemphasizes the Catholic Church’s teaching that it is always intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings ing into existence.

What is the mainline Protestant and Evangelical position on contraception?

As on most issues related to the faith, opinions among Protestant denominations vary.

Historically, the church has viewed contraception as evil. The Church Fathers and early Reformers were consistent in their opposition to birth control. Martin Luther said that contraception was “far more atrocious than incest or adultery” and John Calvin considered it “doubly monstrous” because it “extinguish[es] the hope of the race” and acts “to kill before he is born the hoped-for offspring.”

Most Protestant denominations shared this view until the 1930s. However today, few denominations—whether Mainline or Evangelical—actively oppose the practice.

I don’t oppose contraceptives, so why should I care about this issue?

There are two reasons that all Christians, regardless of their view on contraceptives, should be concerned about this mandate.

The first is because it forces Christians to pay for abortion-inducing drugs. The policy currently requires coverage of Ulipristal (“Ella”), which is chemically similar to the abortion drug RU-486 (mifepristone) and has the same effect (to prevent embryos from being implanted or, if already implanted, to die from lack of nutrition). Additionally, RU-486 is also being tested for possible use as an “emergency contraceptive.” If the FDA approves it for that purpose, it will automatically be included under the mandate.

The second is that it restricts religious liberty by forcing religious institutions to pay for contraceptives and abortifacients even if the employer has a religious or moral objection to such practices.

Okay, while it may be a pro-life concern, it isn’t a religious liberty issue for me since I support the use of contraception, right?

If the mandate is allowed to stand it will set a precedent that the government can not only force citizens to violate their most deeply held beliefs but that we can be sanctioned for refusing to do so.

AsJohn Leonotes, today it is contraceptives and abortifacients, but “down the road it will be about suicide pills, genetic engineering, abortion and mandatory abortion training, transgender operations, and a whole new series of morally problematic procedures about e over the horizon.”

Indeed, as Leo notes in his column, a Catholic-run California hospital was sued because it refused to perform breast-enlargement surgery on a transgendered patient. The state court ruled the hospital had violated the state’s anti-discrimination laws. (Caving under litigation, the hospital paid $200,000 to the transgendered man.)

Didn’t the Obama administration offer promise? What was that about?

In response to the concerns of religious organizations, Obama offered a promise” in which he proposed that panies, instead of religious institutions, be required to cover procedures and products that they find objectionable at no cost in their insurance policies. In other words, the insurer would be required to provide the services “free of charge” and pay for them out of their own pocket.

What’s wrong with promise plan?

As economistSteve Landsburg explains, the promise does not really change the fact that the religious employers are still being forced to pay for the contraceptives-abortifacients:

[A]ll economists (and I hope everyone who’s pleted a Principles course) understands that transferring theresponsibilityfrom employers to insurers amounts to transferring thecostfrom insurance buyers to insurance buyers, which is to say that it’s not a change in policy. One of the first and most important lessons we teach our students is well summarized by a slogan: “The economic burden of a tax is independent of the legal burden”. Ditto for a mandated insurance purchase. It is not the law, but the underlying price-sensitivities of buyers and sellers, that determines where the burden ultimately falls.

Your president knows this. He’s banking that you don’t.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Is Mass Incarceration the New Eugenics?
“Has the War on Drugs revived the 19th Century progressive crusade against ‘degenerates’?” asks Anthony Bradley in the second of this week’s Acton Commentary. The United States currently has over 2.3 million prisoners incarcerated in federal, state, and local jails around the country. According to an April report by the Sentencing Project, that number presents a 500 percent increase in incarcerations over the past 40 years. This increase produces “prison overcrowding and fiscal burdens on states to modate a rapidly...
Poverty, Justice, and Christian Love
“We have replaced charity with humanitarianism, says Michael Matheson Miller in the first of this week’s Acton Commentary, “a hollowed-out secular and materialist vision of Christian love.” Concern for the poor is at the heart of Christianity. Saint John Paul II called poverty one of the greatest moral challenges of our time, and to ignore the plight of the poor has consequences for our eternal souls. Pope Francis addressed poverty in Evangelii Gaudium: “Almost without being aware of it, we...
Explainer: The Supreme Court’s Ruling on Government Prayer
What was the Greece vs. Galloway case about? The short answer: The constitutionality of saying religiously specific prayers (e.g., praying in Jesus name) at government meetings and functions. The (slightly) longer answer: In the town of Greece, located in upstate New York, the Town Board sessions were opened by a prayer from local clergy, mostly leaders of Christian congregations although in a few instances members of other faith traditions offered the invocation (a Jewish man, a Baha’i leader, and a...
‘Destitute And Dying:’ A Human Trafficking Survivor’s Story
Rani Hong was a very young girl in rural India when her life was snatched away from her by human trafficking. In desperation, her mother allowed her to be taken away by a woman she thought she could trust, a woman who promised to care for Rami. And she did, for a while. However, the lure of money was too great and Rami was sold into human trafficking at age seven. I was taken to an area where I did...
Explainer: Boko Haram and the Kidnapped Christian Girls
What is going on with the mass kidnappings of children in Nigeria? During the night of April 16, dozens of armed men from the terrorist group Boko Haram captured over 300 Christian girls aged 12 to 15 who were sleeping in dormitories at Chibok Government Girls Secondary School in northeast Nigeria. About 50 students managed to escape, but 276 were still being held according to Nigerian state police. The group has since captured 8 more girls. The kidnappers took the...
Now Available: ‘On Exchange and Usury’ by Thomas Cajetan
Christian’s Library Press has released a new translation of two treatises on exchange and usury by Thomas Cajetan (1469-1534), a Dominican theologian, philosopher, and cardinal. Although best known for mentaries on the Summa of Thomas Aquinas, Cajetan also wrote dozens of other works, including short treatises on socioeconomic problems. Published under the name On Exchange and Usury, these treatises reflect on the banking industry of the early modern era in the context of the Church’s usury doctrine, examining which transactions...
Why McDonald’s Has Become a School for Remedial Work Skills
“Clean up your own mess. Your mother doesn’t work here.” That was a sign, printed on dot matrix printer paper, which hung in the breakroom of the McDonald’s where I worked. While that was nearly thirty years ago, I suspect that same sign is still there (though probably reprinted on a laser printer). But the idea behind it has changed. Your mother may not work at McDonalds, but pany—and others that hire low-skilled employees—are increasingly taking on the role of...
Chinese Government Destroys Church; Denies Persecution
Wenzhou, China, is known as the “Jerusalem of the East” because of its large Christian population, a population that had, until recently, enjoyed the Sanjiang Church for worship. A massive structure, Sanjiang Church took over 12 years to build and was a site of pilgrimage for Chinese Catholics. Last week, however, the Chinese government (which had previously lauded the structure’s architecture) deemed the structure “illegal” and destroyed the entire building, bricking off massive statues to hide them from sight. The...
The Bible and the Principle of Moral Proximity
“The Bible does say a lot of justice and the poor,” notes Kevin DeYoung, “but if we are to be convicted and motivated by truth, we must pay more careful attention to what the Bible actually does and does not say.” An example is a concept that DeYoung says can be derived from the Bible, the principle of moral proximity: The principle is pretty straightforward, but it is often overlooked: the closer the moral proximity of the poor the greater...
Amnesty International: Release Nigerian Schoolgirls But Legalize Prostitution
Yesterday, Joe Carter wrote about Boko Haram, the terrorist group that has kidnapped hundreds of girls in Nigeria from the Christian school, and is now threatening to sell them into the sex trafficking trade. Salil Shetty, Secretary General of the human rights organization Amnesty International, is calling upon the Nigerian government to initiate a transparent investigation of the girls’ kidnapping and an immediate release of the girls. The horrific abduction shows the serious nature of violations of international humanitarian and...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved