Federal appeals court rejects company's contraception coverage challenge

The court's divided decision makes it more likely the Supreme Court will have to decide if companies making a secular product have to provide contraception coverage to their employees -- a major tenet of the 2010 health care law.

The Washington Post: Contraceptive Mandate Divides Appeals Courts 
A federal appeals court ruling on Friday increased the chances that the Supreme Court in its coming term will need to settle whether secular, for-profit corporations must provide contraceptive coverage to employees despite the owners' religious objections. A divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit ruled that a Pennsylvania cabinet-making company owned by a Mennonite family must comply with the contraceptive mandate contained in the Affordable Care Act (Barnes, 7/26).

The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog: Appeals Court: For-Profit Companies Don't Have Religious Rights
Companies can be prosecuted like in-the-flesh people and they have First Amendment rights to free speech. But the next "corporate personhood" question the Supreme Court will likely confront is whether for-profit companies also enjoy religious rights. Federal courts are fractured on the issue (Palazzolo, 7/26).

Reuters: U.S. Court Rejects Firm's Challenge To Obamacare Contraception Mandate
A divided federal appeals court on Friday rejected a Pennsylvania cabinet maker's religion-based challenge to the 2010 health care law's requirement that larger companies provide workers with health insurance covering birth control. The decision created a split among federal appeals courts, boosting the chance that the U.S. Supreme Court may step in to resolve the dispute over challenges to the provision in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare (Stempel, 7/26).

The Associated Press: Court Rejects Pa. Firm's Health Care Law Challenge
A federal appeals court ruled Friday against the Mennonite owners of a central Pennsylvania furniture manufacturing company who claimed new health insurance requirements that they pay for employees' contraceptive services violated their First Amendment rights. The 2-1 decision issued by a three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upholds a lower court decision that Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. does not qualify for the exemption because it is a for-profit company making a secular product with no formal ties to a church or other religious group (Loviglio, 7/26).


http://www.kaiserhealthnews.orgThis article was reprinted from kaiserhealthnews.org with permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Kaiser Health News, an editorially independent news service, is a program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care policy research organization unaffiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

 

Comments

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
Post

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.

You might also like...
Study reveals gaps in contraception access despite 12-month supply policies