Supreme Court Stops Obama From Forcing Catholic Nuns to Obey HHS Mandate

Supreme Court Stops Obama From Forcing Catholic Nuns to Obey HHS Mandate

Well Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor has issued an order to stop the PPACA law from forcing a group of Nuns to pay for abortion drugs and birth control.

The Court said the Government has a couple of days to respond. It will be interesting to see the 'response' this time. I guess this kind of case is "not a tax".

The affected group who got the injunction is the Little Sisters of the Poor.

In a huge 11th-hour victory for pro-life advocates, the Supreme Court issued an order late Tuesday night stopping the Obama administration from forcing a group of Catholic nuns to obey the HHS mandate that compels them to pay for abortion-causing drugs and birth control.

The group Little Sisters of the Poor received a temporary injunction from the Supreme Court protecting them from the controversial HHS contraceptive mandate. The injunction means that the Little Sisters will not be forced to sign and deliver forms tonight authorizing and directing others to provide contraceptives, sterilizations and drugs and devices that cause abortions. .....

The order was issued by Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who is the Justice assigned for emergency applications from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. Justice Sotomayor also ordered the federal government to file a brief in response to the Little Sisters’ application.

She gave government officials until 10 a.m. EST Friday to respond to her order.

The article cites some other cases as well.


Supreme Court Stops Obama From Forcing Catholic Nuns to Obey HHS Mandate

...and so it begins. The next waves of Super Court approaches to get the key parts of this mess settled in definitive ways.

Wasn't she someone people feared would be Pro-Obama, too? That's the funny thing about Super Judges. They serve for life. Forever. They die in office, by design and intent, unless they choose to retire sooner. I think they all realize that within the first year or so, too. So loyalty for political nonsense ends pretty quick.

I can't wait for the remaining questions to have a full hearing, one case at a time if need be, before the current court and it's composition.

I have very little faith in SCOTUS to do the right thing.
The fact that Sotomayor issued the injunction makes me think that this will start out with some smoke and mirrors. The final ruling will be quite different.

One thing that I'm not quite understanding.

If all the insurance policies must meet those specific "standards", how would an exception be handled by the insurance companie(s) selling the policie(s) ?

Something is missing here.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


But...
SCOTUS justices are not beyond the reach of blackmail. If anything, they would actually be more susceptible to it's effects.

With what we know about the NSA now, even though it may not be a lot....
Can anyone be sure who really runs our nation?

xuenchen
One thing that I'm not quite understanding.

If all the insurance policies must meet those specific "standards", how would an exception be handled by the insurance companie(s) selling the policie(s) ?

Something is missing here.

The ACA mandates minimum care standards, which includes those things the nuns oppose.
The ACA mandates that everyone buys insurance.
This all falls in the governments lap.

I'ts not a victory for pro life advocates.
It's a reprieve for private institutions who should not be made to provide birth control and give abortions.

SEX IS NOT A MANDATORY PRACTICE

The results and responsibility of irresponsible sexual activity or even criminal activity (rape) should not fall on private people or groups. The government already spends huge money on these things.

If the government decides to provide these services then that is politics. Forcing others to pay for it and provide it is interference and abuse of power.

reply to post by xuenchen


Doesn't surprise me one bit. The religious in the US always get their special little exceptions. Funny how they want 'special treatment' under the law, yet cry foul when some other people request the same kinds of things.

Gay marriage for example.

Anyway, Obama hasn't even started to see the headaches that will come to pass with ACA. I imagine the entire program will be shelved in 2 years time.

~Tenth

reply to post by badgerprints


Agreed.
But forcing citizens to buy a commercial product should be unconstitutional too.
SCOTUS thought it was ok though...
We will get screwed.

You know my friend I gave you an S & F for this thought provoking find.

My question this, You're a Female married to another Female, when you feel out the application for insurance and let's say, like the NUN's you're not in a relationship with a Male and No Chance of getting Pregnant.
Is there a Plan For You that Does Not Include Extra's for Preventing Births or Paying for the Birth.

Same question for the Males that are married to their Male Partners.
I mean, Fair is Fair, Right? Luckily, my husband and I don't have to worry about the ACA B S or me getting Pregnant.
But I'm Happy for the Nun's Really I am, but I think these other groups and people of a certain age or have had the operation to prevent getting pregnant needs to be considered.
So,,,, Are they?

reply to post by tothetenthpower

I imagine the entire program will be shelved in 2 years time.

We can only hope to be so lucky.
I feel almost confident enough to bet that we will never see it go away.

reply to post by butcherguy

Agreed.
But forcing citizens to buy a commercial product should be unconstitutional too.
SCOTUS thought it was ok though...
We will get screwed.

Didn't the SCOTUS rule it was a tax? Sly way of covering their ass, while pandering to the administration in power if you ask me.....

But other than that, I agree! We are screwed!

reply to post by butcherguy

I feel almost confident enough to bet that we will never see it go away.

It doesn't really 'need' to go away entirely. It just needs massive reform.

The main goal of the ACA was to improve coverage while dropping costs. It's done neither of those two things so far.

Although I guess waiting a year is probably best before making any kind of concrete judgement about the program, if the launch is any indication of the future, you're all in for a crappy few years.

At least this gives the GOP a hell of a running slogan during the next election. Maybe they'll even beat Hillary if ACA turns out to be that bad.

Oh and and we'll see how Immigration reform turns out.

~Tenth

Isn't this really a religious exemption?

Catholic nuns (and priests) are against abortion and birth control due to their sacred religious tenants.
Therefore, the ruling is saying that the gov. cannot compel them to go against their faith by making abortion and birth control available to others through their financing of it (for others;not themselves) as a provision within their own policies.

reply to post by xuenchen

The Appeals Court sided with Obama regime and this was an emergancy case filed by the Sisters of the Poor in Denver.
The average American has zero chance of winning an exemption in court...
It will be interesting to see details on Obama's response...his entrance to Heavens Gate is on the line like never before!

butcherguy
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

But...
SCOTUS justices are not beyond the reach of blackmail. If anything, they would actually be more susceptible to it's effects.

With what we know about the NSA now, even though it may not be a lot....
Can anyone be sure who really runs our nation?

Anything is possible in theory, but this Supreme Court is why Obamacare is hopelessly broken and didn't go into effect with complete control right at day 1. It's a rough ride, but for those of us who really don't believe the Federal Government has any business in the business of life and death health care, it's a necessary fight to work through, too.

Had the Roberts court not given the states the ability to refuse cooperation with the exchanges and expansion of Medicare/Medicaid without Federal retaliation through funding or other means? We'd already be well into the worst of this whole thing. What some saw as a win for the White House was VERY mixed at best and I've considered it a win for states rights, by far, since the day John Robert's Court made it official. It set the death of Obamacare, as designed for a 50 state system.

Eminent Domain was a head scratcher and I still dislike them over that one. Constitutionally, it sucked.

Citizens United was right on until or unless they want to address ALL Organizations presenting the power of individuals en masse. I.E... Unions, Non-Profits, and US based NGOs as well as just for-profit corporations. Some sought to remove ONE turd from the septic tank and call it a cleaning well done. Well... equal protection theory didn't allow for it and they called it right, IMO.

I have great confidence in their ruling for the law..as they see it. The hope is always that their 9 person consensus is closer to our thinking than someone elses.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

In my view, the fact that Obamacare is hopelessly broken and bad for almost everyone is what will guarantee that we will be stuck with it forever. Our elected representatives will see to that.

Sorry that I am cynical.... but the government is to blame for that too!

reply to post by butcherguy


Better to live in a broken democracy than a 'people's paradise', as the world has ever seen that term pursued in it's history. (More recently as particular interest, of course).

If the Supreme Courts only functional effort can come in breaking things to prevent a one term slide in totally redefining America? Then I'll take that ... If America actually comes to want this? Then the Super Court will come to reflect it by future replacements...and I'll retire as an Ex-pat elsewhere, when that level of certainty becomes clear for direction, and with a heavy heart.

guohua
You know my friend I gave you an S & F for this thought provoking find.

My question this, You're a Female married to another Female, when you feel out the application for insurance and let's say, like the NUN's you're not in a relationship with a Male and No Chance of getting Pregnant.
Is there a Plan For You that Does Not Include Extra's for Preventing Births or Paying for the Birth.

Same question for the Males that are married to their Male Partners.
I mean, Fair is Fair, Right? Luckily, my husband and I don't have to worry about the ACA B S or me getting Pregnant

.
But I'm Happy for the Nun's Really I am, but I think these other groups and people of a certain age or have had the operation to prevent getting pregnant needs to be considered.
So,,,, Are they?

Oh, but see, you're married now and going to get screwed by this bill just like the rest of us who are married.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


If what we've seen so far is any indication, we'll only see about 50% of the people who still have coverage lose it while far only anemic numbers of the 40 some million who are currently uninsured are actually insured under Obamacare.