Advertisement
 

Contraceptive mandate could face tough sledding in Supreme Court

The healthcare law's mandate to require religious-affiliated employers to pay for contraception for their workers has prompted two lawsuits. If the matter gets to the Supreme Court, it will go before justices who recently affirmed — in a 9-0 ruling — that the 1st Amendment gives special leeway to religious employers.

January 30, 2012|By David G. Savage, Washington Bureau
  • A new law could require church-run schools, hospitals and charities to provide free contraceptives to their employees.
A new law could require church-run schools, hospitals and charities to… (Kirk McKoy / Los Angeles…)

Reporting from Washington — The Supreme Court and the Obama administration, already headed for a face-off in March over the constitutionality of the healthcare law, appear to be on another collision course over whether church-run schools, universities, hospitals and charities must provide free contraceptives to their students and employees.

The dispute stems from one of the more popular parts of the new healthcare law: its requirement that all health plans provide “preventive services” for free. That category includes vaccines and such routine screenings as cholesterol checkups and mammograms. Starting this year, it also includes coverage of birth control pills, IUDs and other contraceptives.

Catholic leaders reacted fiercely when the administration announced in recent days that it would hold most religious institutions to that mandate, even those that have moral and religious objections to what some of their lawyers describe as “abortion-inducing drugs.”

Already two religious colleges have sued, and their cause got a major boost earlier this month from a unanimous Supreme Court decision that greatly expanded the definition of religious freedom.

Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan in New York, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, denounced the requirement as “unconscionable,” saying the church should not be forced “to act as if pregnancy is a disease to be prevented at all costs.”

Women’s rights groups, on the other side, say that without the law’s coverage, hundreds of thousands of women, including students at Catholic universities and workers at church-related hospitals, would be denied coverage for one of the most commonly used forms of healthcare.

“This is good health policy and good economic policy,” said Dawn Laguens, vice president at Planned Parenthood. “It increases access to affordable birth control, but it is up to an individual employee to choose it or not. That’s very much the American way.”

The administration agreed to a one-year delay of the rule, but starting next year, health plans, including those offered by religious institutions, must pay for “all FDA-approved forms of contraception,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.  Employers who fail to provide this insurance will face heavy fines.

The law exempts churches, themselves, and some other religious entities that “primarily” employ and serve persons of the same faith. Catholic officials, however, say that definition is too narrow and excludes church-run colleges, hospitals and charities and many primary schools.

“For us, serving non-Catholics has been a point of pride, but we are punished under this rule for serving the common good,” said Anthony R. Picarello Jr., general counsel of the U.S. Catholic Conference.

The dispute already has become a significant political issue. The leading Republican presidential hopefuls have all said they would seek to repeal the healthcare law, but also would end the contraceptive-coverage requirement if they could not eliminate the law entirely.

If Obama wins reelection, however, the requirement seems likely to be fought out in court. Belmont Abbey College, a Catholic school in North Carolina, and Colorado Christian University near Denver have filed suit. College officials say the mandate forces them “to violate their deeply held religious beliefs.” The Catholic Conference has not yet decided on joining a lawsuit, but “the bishops are eager to pursue every lawful means to stop this mandate,” said Picarello.

The legal challenge got a major boost three weeks ago,  when the high court strengthened the Constitution’s protection for religious freedom. In a 9-0 defeat for the administration, the justices said the 1st Amendment gives “special solicitude to the rights of religious organizations” in decisions about their employees.

At issue in that case was a clash between the rights of church employers and the government’s interest in protecting the rights of employees. The administration had backed a job-bias suit filed by a teacher who was fired by a Lutheran school. Churches and church schools are not exempt from civil rights claims, the administration argued.

But Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.said the Constitution does not allow for “government interference with an internal church decision that affects the faith and mission of the church itself.” He called the administration’s view “extreme” and “remarkable.” Legal scholars called his opinion the court’s most important for religious freedom in two decades.

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|