Why Obamacare’s contraception coverage requirement is still up for debate

Most of those cases ended at the beginning of the legal inquiry, with courts ruling that the current mandate for employers to provide contraceptive and abortifacient coverage in their health insurance plans was not a substantial burden on the nonprofits’ religious exercise, even though the nonprofits thought it was.

The decision, by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis, marks a break with other appeals courts that have considered the issue of balancing religious freedom with providing contraceptive and other preventative care to workers.

“Faith-based colleges and universities should be free to operate according to the faith they espouse and live out on a daily basis”, said Gregory Baylor, senior counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom, who argued before the Eighth Circuit in December on behalf of two Christian schools, Dordt College in Iowa, and Cornerstone University in Michigan.

Thursday’s decision, like most of the other appeals court rulings on the issue, involved only an interpretation of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, not the Constitution. The Court ruled in Hobby Lobby that for-profit firms owned by a small group of religiously devout owners could not be required to provide the coverage to their employees.

In 2014, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of family-controlled businesses with a religious objection to paying for some or all of the approved contraceptives.

“In light of the plaintiffs” “sincerely held religious beliefs, we conclude that compelling their participation in the accommodation process by threat of severe monetary penalty is a substantial burden on their exercise of religion”, wrote Judge Roger Wollman.

“That latter argument, if accepted, would make women’s access to contraceptive coverage dependent upon the religious beliefs of their employers”. Other courts have ruled along the same lines.

A federal appeals court on Thursday ruled against ObamaCare’s birth control mandate in a decision that could invite a Supreme Court review.

We should know for sure this fall what course of action the Supreme Court will take.

“With today’s decisions, the [Supreme] Court will have great reason to decide this issue in the next term”, one religious rights group, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, wrote in a statement Thursday. Only four of the nine justices must vote to hear a case in order for the court to take it. The Supreme Court has already granted stays in a number of the cases that have come out of the circuit courts, temporarily stopping the government from enforcing the mandate.

The Obama administration now has the option of asking the full Eighth Circuit to rehear the cases en banc or to go, now or later, to the Supreme Court.

The united three-judge panel of the 8th Circuit took a different path in a straightforward, unemotional opinion. Those courts have sided with the government and held it created an adequate alternative for employers with religious objections.

The U.S. Department of Justice previous year sought to have the joint lawsuit tossed out, calling it a meritless attempt to prevent female employees from obtaining coverage.