Six Common Myths About the Hobby Lobby Ruling Absolutely Debunked

[Joe Cooper]

MYTH: Contraceptives are no longer covered. Not even the morning after
pill.

FACT: All of the twenty contraceptives are provided through an
alternative system provided by Health and Human Services (HHS). It is
true that out of the twenty contraceptive methods approved by the FDA and
now required by the law, Hobby Lobby only objected to the four that were
abortion inducing (abortifacient). These include two �morning after
pills� and two specific IUD�s. However, all twenty contraceptives are
provided through an alternative system devised by HHS for religious
nonprofits, and Hobby Lobby could have been switched over to this system
without additional costs to the parties involved. The published Opinion
of the US Supreme Court went so far as to say that it was �unlawful� for
HHS to enforce the contraceptive mandate when this alternative was
available.

The Supreme Court:

In fact, HHS has already devised and implemented a system that seeks to
respect the religious liberty of religious nonprofit corporations while
ensuring that the employees of these entities have precisely the same
access to all FDA-approved contraceptives as employees of companies whose
owners have no religious objections to providing such coverage. The
employees of these religious nonprofit corporations still have access to
insurance coverage without cost sharing for all FDA-approved
contraceptives; and according to HHS, this system imposes no net economic
burden on the insurance companies that are required to provide or secure
the coverage. (emphasis mine)

Although HHS has made this system available to religious nonprofits that
have religious objections to the contraceptive mandate, HHS has provided
no reason why the same system cannot be made available when the owners of
for-profit corporations have similar religious objections. We therefore
conclude that this system constitutes an alternative that achieves all of
the Government�s aims while providing greater respect for religious
liberty. And under [the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act of 1993
(RFRA)], that conclusion means that enforcement of the HHS contraceptive
mandate against the objecting parties in these cases isunlawful.
(emphasis mine)


MYTH: Now employees have to pay for contraceptives out of pocket.

FACT: No cost increase to employees according to the Supreme Court�s
findings. The system that HHS has devised provides contraceptives through
a third party insurer instead of the employer. Even HHS concluded that
there is �no net economic burden� for switching to this system.

The Court:

The employees of these religious nonprofit corporations still have access
to insurance coverage without cost sharing for all FDA-approved
contraceptives; and according to HHS, this system imposes no net economic
burden on the insurance companies[...].

HHS has determined that this obligation will not impose any net expense
on issuers because its cost will be less than or equal to the cost
savings resulting from the services.


MYTH: Hobby Lobby is a corporation, so it doesn�t have any religious
rights.

FACT: Corporations are made up of �human beings who own, run, and are
employed by them� who still have Constitutional and legal protections.
The Court rejected the argument that the owners of companies forfeit
their legal protections when they organize in one business form or
another.

The Court:

[W]e reject HHS�s argument that the owners of the companies forfeited all
RFRA protection when they decided to organize their businesses as
corporations rather than sole proprietorships or general partnerships.
The plain terms of RFRA make it perfectly clear that Congress did not
discriminate in this way against men and women who wish to run their
businesses as for-profit corporations in the manner required by their
religious beliefs.
When rights, whether constitutional or statutory, are extended to
corporations, the purpose is to protect the rights of these people. For
example, extending Fourth Amendment protection to corporations protects
the privacy interests of employees and others associated with the
company. Protecting corporations from government seizure of their
property without just compensation protects all those who have a stake in
the corporations� financial well-being. And protecting the free-exercise
rights of corporations like Hobby Lobby [�] protects the religious
liberty of the humans who own and control those companies. [�]
Corporations, �separate and apart from� the human beings who own, run,
and are employed by them, cannot do anything at all. (emphasis mine)


MYTH: This opens the door for anyone to opt out of anything they call
�religious� belief.

FACT: Justice Ginsburg raised this objection, so the Majority addressed
it directly. In the Majority Opinion, Justice Alito effectively closed
the door to those who might want to start claiming all sorts of contrived
�religious�exemptions based on this ruling. Furthermore, a religious
exemption to a given law must fit the legal standard of a �sincerely held
religious belief.�

The Court:

[O]ur holding is very specific. We do not hold, [�] that for-profit
corporations and other commercial enterprises can �opt out of any law
(saving only tax laws) they judge incompatible with their sincerely held
religious beliefs.� [�] Nor do we hold, as the dissent implies, that such
corporations have free rein to take steps that impose �disadvantages . .
. on others�


MYTH: Companies will start cutting coverage just to save a buck.

FACT: Money is not a factor in this case. It�s worth saying again that
HHS determined that switching Hobby Lobby employees over to the system
created for nonprofits would have zero net cost to the employer, the
insurer, or the employee. Money is a complete non-issue here.
As for which companies will be allowed to do this, the Supreme Court
universally referred to Hobby Lobby and the other corporations grouped
into this case as �closely held corporations�. This is not something new,
but has a legal definition in tax law. They are formed under local state
laws, but are limited by the IRS to have more than half of the stock
value owned by five or fewer individuals, and cannot be a service
corporation such as an accounting firm, law firm, engineering firm, or a
medical practice. The laws governing closely held corporations vary from
state to state, so they can vary in size and number of employees.


MYTH: Because they can simply opt out of providing coverage, Hobby Lobby
is imposing its religious values on its employees.

FACT: There are penalties (or taxes, if you prefer)written into the law
for opting out. If Hobby Lobby decides to drop insurance coverage
altogether and even one single employee qualifies for a subsidy on one of
the ACA exchanges, then Hobby Lobby would have to pay $2000 per employee
every year, or roughly $26 Million. Per year.If on the other hand they
decide to refuse to provide only those four contraceptives in question,
they would be fined (or taxed) $100 per day for each affected individual;
roughly $475 Million per year. In the words of the Court, �If these
consequences do not amount to a substantial burden, it is hard to see
what would.�

As for imposing religious values, it is equally hard to see how there is
any imposition by Hobby Lobby when HHS could have switched them over to
the other exchange with no change in coverage or cost increases. If
anything � and let�s be completely honest here � the real imposition is
the anti-religious sentiment being imposed upon people of faith. The
Affordable Care Act has been fundamentally anti-religious in its
implementation and execution � from the final vote in the Senate on
Christmas Eve which made itinto law against a broad public protest, to
the refusal of HHS to switch Hobby Lobby to another exchange so their
consciences could remain clear.

The Court:

The court concluded that the contraceptive mandate substantially burdened
the exercise of religion by requiring the companies to choose between
�compromis[ing] their religious beliefs� and paying aheavy fee�either
�close to $475 million more in taxesevery year� if they simply refused to
provide coverage for the contraceptives at issue, or �roughly $26
million� annually if they �drop[ped] health-insurance benefits for all
employees.� Id., at 1141.

So, even the Court concluded that if the employees were to be switched
onto the HHS system devised for nonprofits, �[t]he effect of the HHS-
created accommodation on the women employed by Hobby Lobby and the other
companies involved in these cases would be precisely zero.�

And so the big question is: Why didn�t HHS just do that in the first
place?

All citations from the United States Supreme Court Majority Opinion (573
U. S. ____, 2014).
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-354_olp1.pdf Accessed July
2, 2013.

Source: http://bit.ly/1ystC9o
Remember in November

--
"Apparently, the leading cause of hard drive failures is subpoenas.�
(Clarice Feldman)

"Never underestimate the willingness of white progressives to be offended
on behalf of people who aren�t and to impose their will on those who
didn�t ask for it." (Derek Hunter)

"If the Democrats didn�t have double standards, they wouldn�t have any
standards all." (Chuck Lehmann)