Aleteia logoAleteia logo
Aleteia
Friday 27 November |
The Blessed Virgin Mary, Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal
home iconNews
line break icon

Hobby Lobby Decision Starts to Play Out in Other Cases

Thomas Aquinas College

John Burger - published on 07/01/14

Obama administration files response with Supreme Court, non-profits await rulings.

Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that the religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to family-owned businesses, religious non-profits who have challenged the government mandate of providing contraceptive coverage for employees are waiting to see how Monday’s ruling will affect them.

While the Obama administration said Wednesday that the Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of the religious claims of Hobby Lobby and other businesses supports its position in ongoing disputes with religious nonprofit organizations, some legal experts believe otherwise.

“It would seem to me that…if they’re deciding that a for-profit entity–small companies like [Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties]–that this mandate doesn’t apply to them, I think the implication is it’s not going to apply to religious non-profit organizations,” said Stephen Krason,  Director of the Political Science Program at Franciscan University of Steubenville and co-founder of the Society of Catholic Social Scientists, in an interview Monday. “I can’t see how they could say the mandate would stand up against such outfits as that.”

One of those non-profits, Thomas Aquinas College, in Santa Paula, Calif., is awaiting a decision in its case challenging the HHS mandate and found the Hobby Lobby decision’s implications for the college to be unclear.

In a statement, the college acknowledged that the majority opinion in Hobby Lobby “provided guidance to the government as to how it might achieve its desired goal of guaranteeing cost-free access to four challenged contraceptive methods [which also can act as abortifacients] without imposing a substantial burden on the exercise of religion. It suggested that the government itself could assume the cost of providing the contraceptives or that it could simply extend to closely held for-profit corporations with religious objections the accommodation that has already been established for non-profit organizations with those objections."

Ryan T. Anderson, editor of Public Discourse, a project of the Witherspoon Institute, noted that lower courts have granted relief from the mandate for 26 non-profit organizations because the administration’s accommodation is inadequate.

“These groups are concerned that the accommodation makes them morally complicit with the provision of contraception because they must send a notification to their insurance issuer or administrator, who will then provide plan members with the objectionable drugs and devices,” Anderson wrote. “As legal scholars have pointed out, the accommodation is nothing less than a “permission slip” that authorizes and directs insurance companies or third-party administrators to do what the employer considers a gravely immoral act.”

But Thomas Aquinas was encouraged by another comment in the opinion: that “RFRA was designed to provide very broad protection for religious liberty.” The majority opinion, the college noted, said the plaintiffs’ beliefs “implicate a difficult and important question of religion and moral philosophy, namely, the circumstances under which it is wrong for a person to perform an act that is innocent in itself but that has the effect of enabling or facilitating the commission of an immoral act by another.”  

“This question,” Thomas Aquinas’ statement said, “goes right to the heart of the college’s, and others’, religious objection to the HHS accommodation.”

Attorneys for the college filed a letter with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which has yet to rule on TAC’s appeal. The letter opined that Hobby Lobby does not contradict TAC’s position that the contraceptive andate “does not advance a compelling governmental interest.”

In its first legal response to Monday’s ruling, the Obama Administration on Wednesday urged the court to deny a request from evangelical Wheaton College in Illinois that the government says would prevent students and employees from obtaining free access to emergency contraceptives, according to the Associate Press. The Justice Department said the Hobby Lobby decision essentially endorses the accommodation the administration already has made to religious charities, hospitals and universities.

  • 1
  • 2
Tags:
PoliticsReligious Freedom
Support Aleteia!

If you’re reading this article, it’s thanks to the generosity of people like you, who have made Aleteia possible.

Here are some numbers:

  • 20 million users around the world read Aleteia.org every month
  • Aleteia is published every day in eight languages: English, French, Arabic, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Polish, and Slovenian
  • Each month, readers view more than 50 million pages
  • Nearly 4 million people follow Aleteia on social media
  • Each month, we publish 2,450 articles and around 40 videos
  • We have 60 full time staff and approximately 400 collaborators (writers, translators, photographers, etc.)

As you can imagine, these numbers represent a lot of work. We need you.

Support Aleteia with as little as $1. It only takes a minute. Thank you!

Daily prayer
And today we celebrate...




Top 10
LUXOR FILM FESTIVAL
Zoe Romanowsky
20-year-old filmmaker wins award for powerful...
FIRST CENTURY HOUSE AT THE SISTERS OF NAZARETH SITE
John Burger
British archaeologist confident he has found ...
PADRE PIO
Philip Kosloski
Padre Pio's favorite prayer of petition
CHRIST THE KING
Edifa
Why do we say that "Christ is King"?
VATICAN POPE GOOD FRIDAY COLOSSEUM
Kathleen N. Hattrup
Learn to pray with the early Church and to di...
Miguel Pro
Philip Kosloski
How Bl. Miguel Pro served his people during c...
CHRISTMAS,ADVENT WREATH,FAMILY
Theresa Civantos Barber
7 Advent traditions that are easy to do at ho...
See More
Newsletter
Get Aleteia delivered to your inbox. Subscribe here.