Pat Caldwell on how the Supreme Courts Hobby Lobby decision today is the new Bush v. Gore: On Monday, the Supreme Court issued its decision on Burwell v. Hobby Lobby. Hobby Lobbys owners had objected to a provision in Obamacare that forced the the craft supply store chain to provide its employees with health insurance that covers birth control or pay a fine. In a 5-4 ruling, the conservative justices on the court said that the government cant force Hobby Lobby—or any closely held corporation—to pay for birth control and emergency contraception if doing so would offend the religious beliefs of the companys owners. Justice Samuel Alito, the George W. Bush appointee who penned the majority opinion, went to great lengths to write a limited decision, stressing that the ruling should only apply to Obamacares contraception regulations, and that other employers shouldnt cite Hobby Lobby to justify opposing other laws. This decision concerns only the contraceptive mandate, Alito wrote, and should not be understood to hold that all insurance-coverage mandates, e.g., for vaccinations or blood transfusions, must necessarily fall if they conflict with an employer’s religious beliefs. Nor does it provide a shield for employers who might cloak illegal discrimination as a religious practice. As Alito no doubt knows, thats not how Supreme Court jurisprudence works. The justices often try to limit their decisions to a narrow set of facts. But theyre still setting legal precedent, and their logic is certain to be used in future cases in lower courts—often in unintended ways. There are no take-backsies for Supreme Court decisions. -Erika
Posted on: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 23:00:00 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015