Obama asks high court to review contraception mandate ruling
Source: Reuters
By Lawrence Hurley
WASHINGTON | Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:06pm EDT
(Reuters) - The Obama administration on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to review the legality of a politically volatile provision of the 2010 federal healthcare law requiring employers to provide health insurance that covers birth control.
The administration wants the high court to reverse a June decision by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver favoring arts and crafts retailer Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. That decision said for-profit companies can sometimes assert religious rights if they do not wish to comply with a federal regulation.
Separately, a Christian legal group called the Alliance Defending Freedom filed a petition on Thursday seeking review of a different appeals court ruling in which the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia ruled against the employer.
The group filed on behalf of a Mennonite-owned company in Pennsylvania, Conestoga Wood Specialties.
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/19/us-usa-courts-contraception-idUSBRE98I15N20130919
Koko Ware
(107 posts)If they don't want to help women, then they should not bother to do business. I'd like to see the misogynist companies who opposes ACA shut down.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)used to spend a lot of money at hobby lobby because it was cheap to buy stuff. my wife and i got out of the party business just in time.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)if they keep popping out a baby every two years according to their EMPLOYER'S religion? They have on site day care for all these babies of their female employees who don't use BC? Nevermind, are all their employees the same religion, or even KNOW what their employer's religion is.
lupulin
(58 posts)Does it really mandate a child every 2 years? Are there age caps on that?
quadrature
(2,049 posts)of his second term.
and he is spending it bickering over
a benefit that could be provided
for chump change if sent to a
contractor like Planned-Parenthood
greiner3
(5,214 posts)WTF????????????
"...bickering over a benefit..."
WTF????????????
"...chump change..."
WTF????????????
"...contractor like Planned-Parenthood..."
WTF????????????
WTF????????????
Your Post...
WTF????????????
booley
(3,855 posts)considering he said that religion does not mean one can ignore federal regulations.
Will he hold true to his own words.
Though it bugs me that I see few mention what to me is the obvious.
These are benefits that employees get for WORKING. Why should they get less of a say then the employer who isn't the one who decides when and if contraception is used?