A Victory For Hobby Lobby...But What Does That Mean For Us?

Victory For Hobby Lobby...but what does that mean for us?

I have read this Supreme Court (SCOTUS) Opinion and it leaves me with great concern. I intend to study it further, but here is my take at first glance...

My greatest concern remains that this court continues to acknowledge the federal government’s authority to mandate healthcare.  This is Constitutionally NOT a function of the federal government and the Supreme Court's refusal to limit the federal government's seizure of power just proves James Madison was right when he said;

"If the decision of the judiciary be raised above the authority of the sovereign parties to the Constitution… dangerous powers, not delegated, may not only be usurped and executed by the other departments, but that the judicial department, also, may exercise or sanction dangerous powers beyond the grant of the Constitution..." Virginia Assembly Report, 1800

Here are the facts that we can take away from this Supreme Court opinion:

In the Hobby Lobby opinion, SCOTUS recognizes a correlation between birth control and abortion and the financial impact of birth control upon the businesses.

"The owners of the businesses have religious objections to abortion, and according to their religious beliefs the four contraceptive methods at issue are abortifacients. If the owners comply with the HHS mandate, they believe they will be facilitating abortions, and if they do not comply, they will pay a very heavy price—as much as $1.3 million per day, or about $475 million per year, in the case of one of the companies. If these consequences do not amount to a substantial burden, it is hard to see what would."

SCOTUS sees the potential "unlimited" application of HHS that would be endorsed if SCOTUS held against Hobby Lobby.

"It is HHS’s apparent belief that no insurance-coverage mandate would violate RFRA—no matter how significantly it impinges on the religious liberties of employers—that would lead to intolerable consequences. Under HHS’s view, RFRA would permit the Government to require all employers to provide coverage for any medical procedure allowed by law in the jurisdiction in question—for instance, third trimester abortions or assisted suicide. The owners of many closely held corporations could not in good conscience provide such coverage, and thus HHS would effectively exclude these people from full participation in the economic life of the Nation. RFRA was enacted to prevent such an outcome."

SCOTUS says that the exception carved out for not-for profits can be easily applied to for-profits.

"Although HHS has made this system available to religious nonprofits that have religious objections to the contraceptive mandate, HHS has provided no reason why the same system cannot be made available when the owners of for-profit corporations have similar religious objections. We therefore conclude that this system constitutes an alternative that achieves all of the Government’s aims while providing greater respect for religious liberty. And under RFRA, that conclusion means that enforcement of the HHS contraceptive mandate against the objecting parties in these cases is unlawful."

SCOTUS then does a major CYA and makes this decision SPECIFIC to birth control and SPECIFIC to Hobby Lobby, which will either create an never ending trail of litigation or chill the entire system of due process and force the remainder of the businesses to submit in silence.

"In any event, our decision in these cases is concerned solely with the contraceptive mandate. Our decision should not be understood to hold that an insurance-coverage mandate must necessarily fail if it conflicts with an employer’s religious belief. Other coverage requirements, such as immunizations, may be supported by different interests (for example, the need to combat the spread of infectious disease) and may involve different arguments about the least restrictive means of providing them."

Victory, yes, but very limited in its scope. there are greater dangers lurking about in the Affordable Care Act.  Hobby Lobby's case is just the beginning.  If you want to know how deep this rabbit hole goes, read this article: http://bit.ly/1gnZu7K

It is time for Congress to defund this mess via Article 1 Section 7 and the power of the purse. We cannot let down our guard or our influence. This is just motivation to fight even harder. SCOTUS is NOT on your side and no longer focused upon the Constitution or Liberty! That is abundantly clear.

You can read the Hobby Lobby Supreme Court opinion here: http://1.usa.gov/V2vRBZ


For Reprint please go to http://bit.ly/1m2RQm0

Views: 565


You need to be a member of Tea Party Nation to add comments!

Join Tea Party Nation

Comment by joseph C Avila on July 2, 2014 at 5:26pm
In the present congressional makeup it would impossible for the congress to get such a bill passed. Maybe after Novemeber.
Comment by Mark@BowerLawPC.com on July 1, 2014 at 9:41am

Whether one approves of disapproves of contraception or abortion on moral/religious grounds, this case violates the First Amendment. It approves of the "sincerely held" Christian beliefs of Hobby Lobby, but the same court rejected native Americans' religious rituals (peyote), and the decision specifically rejects the blood transfusion beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses, the non-intervention beliefs of Christian Scientists, Scientologists, and others. This is effectively an endorsement of some religious beliefs, and the rejection of others. That is an establishment of religion, directly contrary to the First Amendment.

Comment by Vern Shotwell on June 30, 2014 at 5:03pm

The proclaimed "victory" in this case seems to be vanishingly small. As I understand it, this case is limited to three or four  abortifacients - morning after pills - and does not even extend to all contraceptives. So, there is no money involved.We are talking pennies per month. Hardly even a moral victory!

Comment by Richard Curtis on June 30, 2014 at 4:23pm

If Women can't control their emotions until they can dig up a condom, and they need an day after pill, I just don't see it. The only other case I can think of is Rape, and if you go to the hospital, they will give you the morning after pill. So what is the big deal from the left??

Comment by Jeff Dover on June 30, 2014 at 4:21pm

It means...

We had better come together as conservatives to remove these people from office, repeal their laws, demolish several of their bureaucracies and replace or defund their judges.

If the leadership of the party we're relying upon to do that doesn't want to do that, we need to replace it as well.  If a Republican politician or candidate for office isn't attempting to effect these changes or isn't campaigning with credible ideas to achieve them, he's just in the way...

Comment by Bonnie Norem on June 30, 2014 at 3:57pm

I am glad to see the Supreme Court's ruling.  I received an email from "Move On" and this is their message: 

"First the Supreme Court said that corporations were people. Now they say corporations are entitled to religious freedoms as well.1

Today's Hobby Lobby decision has opened the door to a brave new world of corporate abuse and discrimination under the guise of "religious liberty." What happens when a business wants to hang a "No Gays Allowed" sign? Or decides that providing health insurance of any kind goes against their newfound religious convictions?

To be clear, this fight isn't about Christians vs. women's freedom or Christians vs. health care coverage. It's about a fringe group of political extremists trying to exploit religion to advance a political agenda.

We can't let this decision go unchecked. So today we're responding with a new effort to block the growing momentum by the religious right and their billionaire backers to redefine religious freedom and grant corporations even more rights intended for people. "

Our minds today are filled with evil thoughts and lies and think they are truths.  As an employee I use to think insurance was a benefit not some right I had to have.  When I got a vacation it was a gift and same with leave.  It was not a demand like today time off with pay for having my baby and my husband also.  Now companies are required to give, give, give, and employees think give me, give me, give me.  If I didn't like the benefits I got then I had the opportunity to go look someplace else.  Today the government acts like it is the employer and we are the puppets being obedient while they lavish in all their vacations and travel.  I see this ruling as a great win for a company because now they are required to have insurance for employees and I think that insurance is one of the best benefits that can be offered and employees should not abuse it!  Many do abuse it and we the people should become more responsible for our life styles and the way we live so we take care of our lives.  Our life is a great privilege also.

Comment by Michael Goodfellow on June 30, 2014 at 3:33pm

This is an incredibly simple decision in that a company may not be forced to provide coverage if they do not want to. If they decided to provide such coverage, fine.

Comment by Debrajoe Smith-Beatty on June 30, 2014 at 3:12pm

Thank you.

Tea Party Nation is a social network

© 2016   Created by Judson Phillips.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service