Appeals court rules suit against birth-control mandate can continue
DENVER — A federal appeals court ruled on Thursday that Hobby Lobby stores have a good case that the federal health care law violates their religious beliefs in ordering them to provide birth control to employees and that they shouldn't be subject to millions in fines while their claim is considered.
The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver decided the Oklahoma City-based arts and crafts chain can proceed with its lawsuit seeking to overturn the birth-control coverage mandate on religious grounds. The judges unanimously sent the case back to a lower court in Oklahoma, which previously said Hobby Lobby must comply with the requirement or start paying millions of dollars in fines next week.
Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. argues for-profit businesses — not just religious groups — should be allowed to seek an exception if the law violates their religious beliefs. Its owners oppose certain types of contraception, including the morning-after pill.
Hobby Lobby is the largest and best-known of more than 30 businesses in several states that have challenged the contraception mandate.
Five of eight active judges hearing the company's case agreed that arguments for exemption from the mandate by for-profit businesses like Hobby Lobby have merit. “Their exercise of religion is substantially burdened,” the judges wrote.
The judges pointed out that Hobby Lobby would be subject to more fines for refusing the contraception mandate — nearly $475 million a year — than if it provided no employee health coverage at all. That action would prompt an annual fine of about $26 million.
Hobby Lobby and its sister store, Christian booksellers Mardel Inc., won expedited federal review because the chain would have faced fines starting Monday for not covering the required forms of contraception. The 10th Circuit judges said the Oklahoma court was wrong not to grant the companies an injunction in the face of serious financial penalties.
“Sincerely religious persons could find a connection between the exercise of religion and the pursuit of profit,” the judges wrote. “Would an incorporated kosher butcher really have no claim to challenge a regulation mandating non-kosher butchering practices?”
The 10th Circuit heard the case before eight active judges instead of the typical three-judge panel, indicating the case's importance.
Hobby Lobby and other companies challenging the contraception mandate say the morning-after pill is tantamount to abortion because it can prevent a fertilized egg from becoming implanted in a womb.
The Department of Justice argued that allowing for-profit corporations to exempt themselves from requirements that violate their religious beliefs would be in effect allowing the business to impose its religious beliefs on employees.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Hungry bears push into Denver area
- Rock threatens base of Arizona dam
- Boeing names next space fleet
- Exploration of sunken German U-boat shown online
- Top Dem on panel says he’ll oppose Obama’s nuke deal
- Video footage expected to aid in hunt for 3 sought in shooting of Illinois police officer
- California wildfires impede holiday fun
- Bidens remain unsure of readiness for campaign
- Gay couple receives marriage license from controversial Ky. clerk’s office
- Charter schools unconstitutional, Washington state’s top court rules
- Clinton aides pressed former State worker Pagliano to testify on use of email