Judge denies Hobby Lobby's morning-after case
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A federal judge Monday rejected a request by Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. to block part of the new federal health care law that requires it to provide the morning-after and week-after birth control pills.
In a 28-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Joe Heaton denied a request by Hobby Lobby to prevent the government from enforcing portions of the health care law that will require it to include contraceptives the company considers objectionable in its health insurance plan.
The Oklahoma City-based arts and craft supply company and a sister company, Mardel Inc., sued the government in September claiming that the companies' Christian owners believe use of the morning-after and week-after birth control pills are tantamount to abortion because they prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a woman's womb. The company's owners also object to providing coverage for certain kinds of intrauterine devices.
At a hearing earlier this month, a government lawyer said the drugs do not cause abortions and that the U.S. has a compelling interest in mandating insurance coverage for them.
In his ruling denying Hobby Lobby's request for an injunction, Heaton noted churches and other religious organizations or religious corporations have been granted constitutional protection from provisions of the law regarding the birth-control measures.
"However, Hobby Lobby and Mardel are not religious organizations," the ruling states. "Plaintiffs have not cited, and the court has not found, any case concluding that secular, for-profit corporations such as Hobby Lobby and Mardel have a constitutional right to the free exercise of religion."
Hobby Lobby's attorney said the companies' owners, the Green family, plan to appeal.
"Every American, including family business owners like the Greens, should be free to live and do business according to their religious beliefs," Kyle Duncan, general counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, said in a statement.
The company, which is self-insured, has said it will face a daily $1.3 million fine beginning Jan. 1 if it ignores the law.
The morning-after pill works by preventing ovulation or fertilization. In medical terms, pregnancy begins when a fertilized egg attaches itself to the wall of the uterus. If taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex, it can reduce a woman's chances of pregnancy by as much as 89 percent.
But critics of the contraceptive say it is the equivalent of an abortion pill because it can prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus.
The lawsuit also alleges that certain kinds of intrauterine devices can destroy an embryo by preventing it from implanting in a woman's uterus.
In a 28-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Joe Heaton denied a request by Hobby Lobby to prevent the government from enforcing portions of the health care law that will require it to include contraceptives the company considers objectionable in its health insurance plan.
The Oklahoma City-based arts and craft supply company and a sister company, Mardel Inc., sued the government in September claiming that the companies' Christian owners believe use of the morning-after and week-after birth control pills are tantamount to abortion because they prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a woman's womb. The company's owners also object to providing coverage for certain kinds of intrauterine devices.
At a hearing earlier this month, a government lawyer said the drugs do not cause abortions and that the U.S. has a compelling interest in mandating insurance coverage for them.
In his ruling denying Hobby Lobby's request for an injunction, Heaton noted churches and other religious organizations or religious corporations have been granted constitutional protection from provisions of the law regarding the birth-control measures.
"However, Hobby Lobby and Mardel are not religious organizations," the ruling states. "Plaintiffs have not cited, and the court has not found, any case concluding that secular, for-profit corporations such as Hobby Lobby and Mardel have a constitutional right to the free exercise of religion."
Hobby Lobby's attorney said the companies' owners, the Green family, plan to appeal.
"Every American, including family business owners like the Greens, should be free to live and do business according to their religious beliefs," Kyle Duncan, general counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, said in a statement.
The company, which is self-insured, has said it will face a daily $1.3 million fine beginning Jan. 1 if it ignores the law.
The morning-after pill works by preventing ovulation or fertilization. In medical terms, pregnancy begins when a fertilized egg attaches itself to the wall of the uterus. If taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex, it can reduce a woman's chances of pregnancy by as much as 89 percent.
But critics of the contraceptive say it is the equivalent of an abortion pill because it can prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus.
The lawsuit also alleges that certain kinds of intrauterine devices can destroy an embryo by preventing it from implanting in a woman's uterus.
I wonder when these holier than thou groups are going to get it through their heads that birth control and abortion are personal and private matters that they have no say in. If you don't like birth control fine, don't use it. If you don't want an abortion don't have one. Simple. However you do not have any right to tell anyone else that they can or can not have these things.
 @DeadRabitz If you want birth control you pay for it. if you want an abortion you pay for it.  I do not see or read anything that says the employee can't have birth control or an abortion,they just don't want to pay for it.  Why is it you zealots get to dictate and force others to do as you believe ?  What happened to Progressive and Democrat tolerance ?  Or diversity ?  OH ! My bad ! That is only for the things you want .
@Maynard G Krebbs Get off your high horse, you know that they do indeed pay for these things when they pay for their health insurance.
@LocalLady I don't see how they have a case. Birth control is a choice. I don't think that anyone other than a physican and the person who chooses to use it should be involved. Since it is a healthcare decision it should be covered by insurance.
@Maynard G Krebbs:
Â
Spoken like someone who has no clue whatsoever about how health insurance/benefits work.
Â
Hobby Lobby/Mardel is a self-insured plan. That means they most likely have a TPA who processes all their claims & makes the payments for them. There is no way to set up seperate benefits for those "with" contraceptives & those without. So their solution to a problem that only exists in their minds is to try to get the feds to agree so that they can simply deny contraceptives altogether.
Â
But the thing is, they are basing it NOT on science but on their opinion. Even if they were to win, there are ways around it. There are conversion tables available online showing how many doses of s conventional contraceptive pill a person needs to take to be equivalent to the morning after pill,.
Â
To me, as a woman, this sounds simply like the first step in denying any & all contraceptive coverage for their employees. If I recall, there is a company in Oklahoma that prior to ACA required a woman to get authorization for BCP so that the employer could "screen" who was using them, and they would deny all claims for contraceptive use - only paying for ones that were used for diagnoses other than contraception.
Â
"They" do not want contraception used, "they" do not want the morning after pill used - "they" want every pregnancy carried to term (every sperm is sacred...). Yet, when the baby is born, "they" do not give a pat'sw pattootie about making sure they are healthy & well cared for. "They" seem to think their obli=gation stops at the point that that baby is born.
Â
Too bad "they" can't get pregnant - I bet it would change their tune!
Employees are already paying for their share of the costs. Just like how everyone won't be in an emergency room at the same time,it's there when it's absolutely needed. Just because you won't ever need to go through an abortion yourself doesn't mean you don't have to pay in. I don't hear women bitching about having to help pay premiums for nut cancer.A couple years ago having any pre-existing condition would negate coverage, and people with low lifetime maximums would have hit their limit on very costly diseases or impairments. So, hooray for being fair!
@Maynard G Krebbs @Maynard Now you are just showing your ignorance. First of all, most companies the offer healthcare offer different plans. Second, hobby lobby is sueing so that they do not have to cover birth control at all. Their by removing choice, that seems pretty dictatorish to me. So again, it comes down to choice. If you don't want to use birth control or have an abortion, don't. However the choice should be there and the only people who have should have any say are those whom it directly affects. So get off your high horse.
 @DeadRabitz  @Maynard You sir should stop being a dictator . It is the company who supplies and pays fro the insurance. A fair deal would be an opt in or out policy. Thereby the older worker and those not wanting that coverage doesn't have to pay for it. There are many choices when you buy insurance. Deductibles,minimum overages,rental,replacement.Â
I wonder how many days they will accrue the fines and then declare bankruptcy and blame Obama & the ACA for their poor management decision.
@EMDF9A - hey 'everyone else is doing it'. Blaming Obamacare for laying off people (who were going to be laid off anyway). It's the convienient excuse of right wing employers who didn't get thier way when Obama got re-elected.
Â
Not one employer has shown that they didn't already plan or investigate these so called 'Obamacare layoffs' when the economic conditions (WITHOUT Obamacare's effects) showed it was going to probably have to happen.Â
Â
It's easy to flail around and blame someone else for your own failings to plan ahead for the current economic conditions.  Employers have been blanketly blaming Unions for years - people are nearly deaf to them crying wolf in that direction (they've done it soo many times) - so now, they cry wolf at the latest scapegoat - "Obamacare".
Â
No - I'm not stupid enough to think that Obamacare doesn't have a cost somewhere to someone. Nor am I stupid enough to consider Obama as 'dear leader' or 'the annointed one'.  I'm also not stupid enough to blindly believe employers who are currently making millions upon millions in profits and still will after Obamacare goes into full effect - who suddenly claim that this somewhat slight increase in insurance costs is going to destroy thier ability to do business.....  And they pull that stunt while they'll still be making millions upon millions in profits.....
Â
Add that to the 'OUR rights to force our religion upon people who don't want it' that these companies are pulling on thier employees.
Â
Makes you wonder how truthful they are.
Â
@FormerMarineSgt I was never in the Service, so I cant salute you... but I sure wish I could. You really have your head securely fastened where it should be!
So much for pro-choice.
Â
 @subcaller Yeah, now if Hobby Lobby is illegitimately raped, it'll have access to emergency contraception.
In only contraception had been forced on Ann Dunham
This comment has been deleted
Good to see the court made the right decision. Employers are not allowed to impose their personal belief's on you in any way including your healthcare.
 @JFR So why are you allowed to force your beliefs on them ?Â
The US Courts do not have the authority to enforce this Obama care.
@HullenbeckCowl really since when?
 @HullenbeckCowl in what way do they not have the authority to uphold a law passed by congress?
@HullenbeckCowl - in the alternate reality bubble that these folks live in, nothing is enforcable except right wing realities. That's how.
 @HullenbeckCowl Yes they do.Â