SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Supreme Court's Women in Scathing Dissent on Contraception Ruling
High Court Blocks Obamacare's Contraception Mandate for Christian College
Jul 04, 2014
The US Supreme Court late Thursday handed religiously affiliated nonprofit groups a big victory in the ongoing battle between 'religious freedom' and women's rights.
The unsigned, provisional ruling exempts Wheaton College in Illinois from the Obamacare contraceptive coverage requirement if the Christian school tells the Obama administration that it objects to providing birth control to its employees and students for religious reasons.
The court's order drew an unusually angry reaction from the 3 female Justices: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor. The three women issued a scathing 16-page dissent (.pdf) that sharply criticized the court majority for backtracking on its Hobby Lobby decision last Monday.
The court's 5-4 decision in Burwell v Hobby Lobby provided for-profit corporations with a similar exemption.
"Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe they can take us at our word," Justice Sotomayor wrote. "Not so today."
The court's action, she added, even "undermines confidence in this institution."
"After expressly relying on the availability of the religious-nonprofit accommodation to hold that the contraceptive coverage requirement violates [the Religious Freedom Restoration Act] as applied to closely held for-profit corporations, the Court now, as the dissent in Hobby Lobby feared it might, retreats from that position."
"I do not doubt that Wheaton genuinely believes that signing the self-certification form is contrary to its religious beliefs," wrote Sotomayor. "But thinking one's religious beliefs are substantially burdened - no matter how sincere or genuine that belief may be - does not make it so."
"The issuance of an injunction in this case will presumably entitle hundreds or thousands of other objectors to the same remedy," she said.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
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 |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
The US Supreme Court late Thursday handed religiously affiliated nonprofit groups a big victory in the ongoing battle between 'religious freedom' and women's rights.
The unsigned, provisional ruling exempts Wheaton College in Illinois from the Obamacare contraceptive coverage requirement if the Christian school tells the Obama administration that it objects to providing birth control to its employees and students for religious reasons.
The court's order drew an unusually angry reaction from the 3 female Justices: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor. The three women issued a scathing 16-page dissent (.pdf) that sharply criticized the court majority for backtracking on its Hobby Lobby decision last Monday.
The court's 5-4 decision in Burwell v Hobby Lobby provided for-profit corporations with a similar exemption.
"Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe they can take us at our word," Justice Sotomayor wrote. "Not so today."
The court's action, she added, even "undermines confidence in this institution."
"After expressly relying on the availability of the religious-nonprofit accommodation to hold that the contraceptive coverage requirement violates [the Religious Freedom Restoration Act] as applied to closely held for-profit corporations, the Court now, as the dissent in Hobby Lobby feared it might, retreats from that position."
"I do not doubt that Wheaton genuinely believes that signing the self-certification form is contrary to its religious beliefs," wrote Sotomayor. "But thinking one's religious beliefs are substantially burdened - no matter how sincere or genuine that belief may be - does not make it so."
"The issuance of an injunction in this case will presumably entitle hundreds or thousands of other objectors to the same remedy," she said.
The US Supreme Court late Thursday handed religiously affiliated nonprofit groups a big victory in the ongoing battle between 'religious freedom' and women's rights.
The unsigned, provisional ruling exempts Wheaton College in Illinois from the Obamacare contraceptive coverage requirement if the Christian school tells the Obama administration that it objects to providing birth control to its employees and students for religious reasons.
The court's order drew an unusually angry reaction from the 3 female Justices: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor. The three women issued a scathing 16-page dissent (.pdf) that sharply criticized the court majority for backtracking on its Hobby Lobby decision last Monday.
The court's 5-4 decision in Burwell v Hobby Lobby provided for-profit corporations with a similar exemption.
"Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe they can take us at our word," Justice Sotomayor wrote. "Not so today."
The court's action, she added, even "undermines confidence in this institution."
"After expressly relying on the availability of the religious-nonprofit accommodation to hold that the contraceptive coverage requirement violates [the Religious Freedom Restoration Act] as applied to closely held for-profit corporations, the Court now, as the dissent in Hobby Lobby feared it might, retreats from that position."
"I do not doubt that Wheaton genuinely believes that signing the self-certification form is contrary to its religious beliefs," wrote Sotomayor. "But thinking one's religious beliefs are substantially burdened - no matter how sincere or genuine that belief may be - does not make it so."
"The issuance of an injunction in this case will presumably entitle hundreds or thousands of other objectors to the same remedy," she said.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.