|
 With four conservative justices and four liberals, the court did not
rule on the merits of the legal challenge by nonprofit Christian
employers who objected to the 2010 healthcare law's requirement that
they provide female workers with medical insurance paying for
contraceptives.
The court's action avoided a possible 4-4 split that would have
affirmed the lower-court rulings. The justices, shorthanded
following February's death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia,
threw out seven rulings by federal appeals courts around the country
that had backed the Obama administration.
The justices handed at least a short-term victory to the religious
employers, primarily Roman Catholic organizations.
The decision suggested a possible compromise for the lower courts
that would allow women to get contraception coverage without
violating the religious rights of employers, by having the
government arrange coverage directly with health insurers rather
than requiring employers to sign off on it.
"The court expresses no view on the merits of the cases. In
particular, the court does not decide whether petitioners' religious
exercise has been substantially burdened," the unsigned ruling
stated.
In a separate order, the court sent six other pending cases on the
same issue back to lower courts, including two in which the
religious employers prevailed.
Among the employers challenging the contraception mandate were the
Roman Catholic archdioceses of Washington and Pittsburgh, the Little
Sisters of the Poor order of nuns, and Christian colleges.
"We are pleased that the court confirms that there is a path forward
that recognizes our religious liberty, yet we also recognize that
this struggle will continue," said Cardinal Donald Wuerl, archbishop
of Washington.
The justices in previous decisions since 2012 had fended off other
major conservative challenges to Obamacare, considered Obama's
signature domestic policy achievement.
Obama, following the court's action, reiterated his demand that the
U.S. Senate confirm Merrick Garland, his nominee to replace Scalia.
"I won't speculate as to why they punted, but my suspicion is if we
had nine Supreme Court justices instead of eight there might have
been a different outcome," Obama told the online media outlet
Buzzfeed.
'SEAMLESS ACCESS'
"We are disappointed that the court did not resolve once and for all
whether the religious beliefs of religiously affiliated nonprofit
employers can block women's seamless access to birth control,"
Gretchen Borchelt of the National Women’s Law Center added.
[to top of second column] |
The dispute before the justices focused on whether nonprofit
entities that oppose the contraception mandate on religious grounds
can object under a 1993 U.S. law called the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act to a compromise measure offered by the Obama
administration.
The Christian employers challenged the 2013 compromise that let
organizations opposed to providing insurance covering contraception
to comply with the law without actually paying for the coverage.
Under the compromise, employers can certify they are opting out of
the requirement by signing a form and submitting it to the
government. The government then asks insurers to pay the cost of
contraceptives.
The court's decision, with no justices issuing a dissent, declined
to decide whether the accommodation violated the employers'
religious rights by forcing them to authorize the contraception
coverage even if they are not paying for it.
Sonia Sotomayor, joined by fellow liberal justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg, wrote a concurring opinion stressing the narrow nature of
the decision. Lower courts should not view the ruling "as signals of
where this court stands," Sotomayor wrote.
The court told the lower courts to consider modified positions that
the government and the employers have taken following a request by
the justices after oral arguments in March for the two sides to
outline possible compromises.
The administration had conceded there may be an alternative way of
providing birth control coverage without requiring employers to sign
off on it.
For their part, the employers said their religious rights would not
be infringed upon if the government required coverage to be supplied
by their private insurer as long as they do not have to take any
action seen as endorsing it.
The Christian employers call birth control immoral and assert that
the federal government should not force religious believers to pick
between following their faith and following the law.
(Additional reporting by Doina Chiacu and Susan Heavey)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
