Supreme Court

Update: The Contraception Mandate at the Supreme Court



In 31 days, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius – but who’s counting? Just about everyone, it seems.

Since amici briefs were due to the Court on January 28th, the waiting game has begun. The opportunity to influence the justices came with the amici briefs, and will come again with oral argument on March 25th.

As these cases have the potential to change the way we interpret religious liberty and the right to make choices about and access health care, the “waiting game” has given rise to much writing, predicting and debate over these cases.

In anticipation of oral argument, it is important to remain up to speed on the arguments of the various sides, and other scholarly work on these issues:

At the very beginning of the year, the Court – specifically Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor – got involved in one of the contraception cases that addresses religious non-profits. Little Sisters of the Poor filed for a preliminary injunction asking they be excused from having to certify their objection to birth control and thus be accommodated under the mandate. The government argued that because their insurer is an exempt organization, Little Sisters is also exempt. The Court granted the injunction, but very clearly stated that the decision does not reflect the justices’ views on the legal questions in the case.

Thus, we wait. We read. We predict. We plan. But we will not have a better idea of how the justices are considering this case until March 25th and the decision from the Court will likely not come down until June. Keep checking back with RACblog for updates and resources as these cases progress.

Twitter Digg Delicious Stumbleupon Technorati Facebook Email
Sarah Greenberg

About Sarah Greenberg

Sarah Greenberg is the Senior Legislative Assistant at the RAC. She graduated in 2013 from Cornell University, and is originally from New York, NY. Sarah was an Eisendrath Legislative Assistant in 2013-2014.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Religious Liberty and Reproductive Rights: Understanding the Issues in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby | Fresh Updates from RAC - June 11, 2014

    […] Feb. 21, 2014: Update: The Contraception Mandate at the Supreme Court […]

  2. Religious Liberty and Reproductive Rights: Understanding the Issues in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby | Women of Reform Judaism - March 19, 2014

    […] Feb. 21, 2014: Update: The Contraception Mandate at the Supreme Court […]

  3. Counting Down to Hobby Lobby | Fresh Updates from RAC - March 5, 2014

    […] In just under three weeks, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Sebelius v. Hobby LobbyStores Inc. and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius. These two cases ask whether private corporations have ability to exercise religious freedom, and if so, whether the contraception mandate enacted by the Affordable Care Act violates the religious freedom of those corporations under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). If you want to read more about the details of the case, and to learn more about the Reform Movement’s position on the contraception mandate, check out this blog. […]

Leave a Reply

*

<