High court hears arguments regarding the birth control coverage mandate

Mar 26 2014

Justices appeared divided over this case, which involves both issues of religious freedoms and a provision of the health overhaul.  

Reuters: Religious Fight Over Contraception Splits Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court appeared closely divided on Tuesday as it weighed whether business owners can object on religious grounds to a provision of President Barack Obama's healthcare law that requires employers to provide health insurance that covers birth control (Hurley and Biskupic, 3/25).

The Associated Press: High Court Seems Divided Over Birth Control Rule
The case argued Tuesday involves family-owned companies that provide health insurance to their employees, but object to covering certain methods of birth control that they say can work after conception, in violation of their religious beliefs (Sherman, 3/25).

Fox News: Supreme Court Takes Up Obamacare Contraceptive Mandate In Landmark Case
Some of the nearly 50 businesses that have sued over covering contraceptives object to paying for all forms of birth control. But the companies involved in the high court case are willing to cover most methods of contraception, as long as they can exclude drugs or devices that the government says may work after an egg has been fertilized. The largest company among them, Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., and the Green family that owns it, say their "religious beliefs prohibit them from providing health coverage for contraceptive drugs and devices that end human life after conception" (3/25). 

The Chicago Tribune: Supreme Court Sharply Divided On Obamacare Birth Control Mandate
The U.S. Supreme Court showed no clear consensus on Tuesday about whether business owners can object on religious grounds to a provision of President Barack Obama's healthcare law requiring employers to provide health insurance that covers birth control. During the first half of an oral argument, three justices from the court's liberal wing vigorously defended the so-called contraception mandate by firing repeated questions at the lawyer, Paul Clement, who asked the court to strike it down. As the 90-minute argument continued, conservatives began to give similar treatment to Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, the Obama administration lawyer defending the mandate (3/25).

The Wall Street Journal: High Court's Female Justices Dominate Contraception Questioning
The female justices, part of the court's liberal wing, repeatedly pressed corporate challengers to the Affordable Care Act requirement that employers cover all forms of contraception in workers' health plans. Lawyer Paul Clement, representing the challengers, received little time to offer opening remarks on his position before the court jumped in with questions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor started by asking: If corporations can object on religious grounds to providing contraception coverage, could they also object to vaccinations or blood transfusions? (Kendall and Radnofsky, 3/25).

Politico: Hobby Lobby Case: Justices Skeptical Of White House Position
The Supreme Court expressed skepticism today of the legality of the Obama administration's refusal to accommodate for-profit companies' religious objections to the Obamacare contraceptive requirement.
A majority of the justices seemed particularly doubtful of the administration's claim that for-profit companies have no religious rights under federal law. Several questioned why the administration couldn't give for-profit companies whose owners object to the requirement on religious ground the same kind of accommodation that has been offered to religious non-profits (Haberkorn and Gerstein, 3/25).

NBC News: Protesters Rally As Supreme Court Hears Case On Obamacare And Religion 
Protesters chanted and waved signs at the Supreme Court on Tuesday while the justices convened to hear a closely watched case -; whether Obamacare violates the religious freedom of employers by requiring them to provide insurance for contraceptives. A crowd of perhaps 500 people gathered in the snow outside the court. Most appeared to be on the side of the government, which is arguing that freedom of religion applies only to company owners as individuals, not to the companies themselves (Curry, 3/25). 

Read this the Daily Report summary of the news in advance of the arguments that set the scene for today's action as well as earlier, related KHN coverage, Justices To Weigh Contraceptive Mandate Against Religious Freedom Claims, by Stuart Taylor.