On May 16, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously chose to send the Zubik v. Burwell case, which challenges the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive requirement for employers, back to the lower courts.
Advertisement
Deciding nothing but perhaps buying time, the justices asked lower courts to take another look at the issue in search of a compromise.
In an unsigned unanimous opinion, the court said it is sending the case back to lower courts to explore whether a compromise in the case is possible.
Pizer of Lambda Legal said in a statement that the “decision means employees of these religious nonprofit employers should receive no-cost birth control coverage because these lawsuits can be taken as notice of the employers’ objections to this health insurance”. Contraceptive coverage is a relatively minor part of the law’s overall scheme.
Religious organizations have the freedom to peacefully operate according to their beliefs without fear of severe penalties by the government.
The US Supreme Court on Monday failed to resolve a major case involving the Obamacare law’s mandatory birth control coverage, telling lower courts to reconsider the matter after tossing out their rulings favouring President Barack Obama.
The dispute before the justices focused on whether nonprofit entities that oppose the contraception mandate on religious grounds can object under a 1993 US law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to a compromise measure offered by the Obama administration. In front of the Supreme Court, the government admitted that the latest regulation required the forced participation of the Little Sisters and that they did, in fact, have other ways to deliver the services without compelling their participation.
She notes that “the Courts of Appeals remain free to reach the same conclusion or a different one on each of the questions presented by these cases”. The case concerns the administration’s arrangement for sparing faith-based groups from paying the birth control costs of women covered under their health plans.
“It’s really a win-win situation for both sides”, Smith responds, describing it as the government gets to give contraceptives to whichever employees of these groups want them.
The Obama administration offered what it said was a compromise that would accommodate religiously affiliated organizations such as universities, hospitals and charities that wish to be freed from the obligation, but would still allow women to receive the coverage. Furthermore, they argue the government is “hijacking” their health plans, which is an agreement between them and their insurers.
“The court has recognized that the government changed its position”, said Mark Rienzi, the lead attorney for the Little Sisters of the Poor.
Advertisement
The justices of the court, which still has a vacancy left by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death in February, were obviously trying to find a clever way to avoid coming out in a 4-4 tie on such a thorny issue. In this case, the religious groups object to emergency contraceptives, including the so-called morning-after-pill, and intrauterine devices, which they liken to so-called “abortifacients” – or drugs that induce an abortion.
