

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The mandate, which requires employers' healthcare plans to cover FDA-approved contraceptive methods, exempts houses of worship, but not for-profit corporations.
The challenge to the law comes from two separate, but related cases -- Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius. The Root summarizes:
The husband-and-wife owners of the Hobby Lobby chain of craft stores argue in court papers that they do not want their employee health insurance plan to include emergency contraception that could "end human life after conception." That is a reference to the type of contraception known as the morning-after pill.
Conestoga goes further in its pleadings, not wanting to cover contraception that could "take a human life" or "prevent its creation through drugs and intrauterine devices."
The cases also center around the "personhood" of corporations. The Guardian reports:
Central to the case is whether for-profit companies have a right to exercise religious freedom under either the first amendment's free exercise clause or under a federal law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Under the 1993 federal law, the government is prohibited from imposing a substantial burden on religious exercise, unless it demonstrates a compelling interest and employs the "least restrictive means" of furthering that interest.
The lower courts were split on the issue. Hobby Lobby won at the 10th circuit court of appeals, in a ruling that said the firm was a "person" under the RFRA. Conestoga Wood lost at the third circuit court of appeals, because the court said that for-profit secular corporations could not engage in religious exercise under the RFRA. The supreme court agreed to settle the rulings.
A decision siding with the for-profit companies "would set a profoundly dangerous precedent to allow businesses to deny their employees coverage for care and services essential to their reproductive health and long-term well-being on the basis of something as arbitrary as personal beliefs," stated Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights.
"Just as it upheld the Affordable Care Act, the U.S. Supreme Court should take this opportunity to both protect the individual rights of employees and preserve the core benefits that this historic law provides for millions of women--benefits that are essential to their health, lives, families, and future," Northup stated.
A Court decision is expected in late June.
Twitter users in support of the mandate are marking the day with the hashtag #NotMyBossBusiness:
Tweets about "#NotMyBossBusiness"
________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

The mandate, which requires employers' healthcare plans to cover FDA-approved contraceptive methods, exempts houses of worship, but not for-profit corporations.
The challenge to the law comes from two separate, but related cases -- Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius. The Root summarizes:
The husband-and-wife owners of the Hobby Lobby chain of craft stores argue in court papers that they do not want their employee health insurance plan to include emergency contraception that could "end human life after conception." That is a reference to the type of contraception known as the morning-after pill.
Conestoga goes further in its pleadings, not wanting to cover contraception that could "take a human life" or "prevent its creation through drugs and intrauterine devices."
The cases also center around the "personhood" of corporations. The Guardian reports:
Central to the case is whether for-profit companies have a right to exercise religious freedom under either the first amendment's free exercise clause or under a federal law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Under the 1993 federal law, the government is prohibited from imposing a substantial burden on religious exercise, unless it demonstrates a compelling interest and employs the "least restrictive means" of furthering that interest.
The lower courts were split on the issue. Hobby Lobby won at the 10th circuit court of appeals, in a ruling that said the firm was a "person" under the RFRA. Conestoga Wood lost at the third circuit court of appeals, because the court said that for-profit secular corporations could not engage in religious exercise under the RFRA. The supreme court agreed to settle the rulings.
A decision siding with the for-profit companies "would set a profoundly dangerous precedent to allow businesses to deny their employees coverage for care and services essential to their reproductive health and long-term well-being on the basis of something as arbitrary as personal beliefs," stated Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights.
"Just as it upheld the Affordable Care Act, the U.S. Supreme Court should take this opportunity to both protect the individual rights of employees and preserve the core benefits that this historic law provides for millions of women--benefits that are essential to their health, lives, families, and future," Northup stated.
A Court decision is expected in late June.
Twitter users in support of the mandate are marking the day with the hashtag #NotMyBossBusiness:
Tweets about "#NotMyBossBusiness"
________________

The mandate, which requires employers' healthcare plans to cover FDA-approved contraceptive methods, exempts houses of worship, but not for-profit corporations.
The challenge to the law comes from two separate, but related cases -- Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius. The Root summarizes:
The husband-and-wife owners of the Hobby Lobby chain of craft stores argue in court papers that they do not want their employee health insurance plan to include emergency contraception that could "end human life after conception." That is a reference to the type of contraception known as the morning-after pill.
Conestoga goes further in its pleadings, not wanting to cover contraception that could "take a human life" or "prevent its creation through drugs and intrauterine devices."
The cases also center around the "personhood" of corporations. The Guardian reports:
Central to the case is whether for-profit companies have a right to exercise religious freedom under either the first amendment's free exercise clause or under a federal law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Under the 1993 federal law, the government is prohibited from imposing a substantial burden on religious exercise, unless it demonstrates a compelling interest and employs the "least restrictive means" of furthering that interest.
The lower courts were split on the issue. Hobby Lobby won at the 10th circuit court of appeals, in a ruling that said the firm was a "person" under the RFRA. Conestoga Wood lost at the third circuit court of appeals, because the court said that for-profit secular corporations could not engage in religious exercise under the RFRA. The supreme court agreed to settle the rulings.
A decision siding with the for-profit companies "would set a profoundly dangerous precedent to allow businesses to deny their employees coverage for care and services essential to their reproductive health and long-term well-being on the basis of something as arbitrary as personal beliefs," stated Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights.
"Just as it upheld the Affordable Care Act, the U.S. Supreme Court should take this opportunity to both protect the individual rights of employees and preserve the core benefits that this historic law provides for millions of women--benefits that are essential to their health, lives, families, and future," Northup stated.
A Court decision is expected in late June.
Twitter users in support of the mandate are marking the day with the hashtag #NotMyBossBusiness:
Tweets about "#NotMyBossBusiness"
________________