Case Study: Burwell V. Hobby

The court ruled eight-to-one, with Justice Antonia Scalia delivering majority’s opinion. Justice Scalia said there was not much to think when he heard about the case. He said Abercrombie clearly did not hire Elauf because of her accomodating her religious practice. The justices believed religion should not be involved when deciding who to hire. The only time it might be condidered is when hiring people who is practicing their religion would make the company to have “undue harship”.

Hobby Lobby, I was on the fence about how I felt. I first completely agreed with the Green’s because it is their right to say no to something that goes totally against their beliefs. As the Greens believe that life begins at conception, these contraceptives are killing a baby in their minds and religion. They don’t think of it as a  fertilized egg, they think of it as a little human being that they are paying for their employees to get rid off. For a department to mandate that is totally wrong.

On June 30, 2014, the Supreme Court granted a landmark victory for religious liberty, ruling that family-owned corporations do not lose their religious freedom and could hold religious objections that allow them to opt out of the insurance coverage for contraception under the Affordable Care Act. The decision caused and uproar and ignited protests around the nation. No matter how unpopular the ruling in favor of Hobby Lobby was or how you feel about contraceptives, the ruling was a victory for believers who seek to live by faith and arguably, no other family in America, fit this mold more than the Green family. David Green, Hobby Lobby’s founder, and CEO, consistently made business decisions and choices based on biblical principles and his

A recent federal lawsuit has been filed by the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) challenging the constitutionality of three provisions of the Setonia’s Abortion Laws. The three provisions ACLU are challenging are as follows (McCauliff): • Law which prevents state health officials from renewing or issuing licenses to abortion clinics located with 2000 feet of an elementary school (McCauliff). • Law which requires physicians performing abortions to complete 10 hours annually of continuing medical education on abortion procedures (McCauliff). • Law which requires abortion providers to give every patient a copy of her medical records, regardless of whether the patient requests such records (McCauliff).

These directors were claiming that the ruling that led to their conviction had violated the 14th Amendment, which states citizens’ rights to privacy and equal protections from the laws. Issue: Is there existence of a right in the Bill of Rights allowing married couples to use contraceptives to prevent conception? Decision: Yes.

Obviously the Hobby Lobby won the case for a reason. The Green family prior to this case had settled with the Affordable Healthcare Act that they would not support for the payment of certain birth control supplements due to their religious beliefs. All other Hobby Lobby employees using this health care had no problem with this, except Ms. Burwell. Ms. Burwell did have a problem with this; so she decided to sue, and overall lost her case. Due to the fact the Green family religious beliefs go against these certain birth controls U.S. could not deny their right’s, seeing as America was founded on the belief of religious freedom.

2. There are other approaches through which the government can provide affordable/free contraceptive coverage to female employees, without involvement from the Little Sisters and their health

Hobby Lobby ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby giving family owned businesses the right to be exempted from laws for religious exceptions. This lawsuit was in response to the Affordable Care Act’s insurance mandate of providing birth control to female employees. But some strict Christians are against certain methods of contraception due to the belief that the contraception prevents fertilized embryos from implantation. By allowing a business owner to remove the birth control methods that do not follow their Christian faith, the government is opening the door for other religious groups and businesses to reject other government mandated decisions. These decisions differ from the current conscientious objection laws that prevent healthcare providers from having to participate in procedures, such as abortions, if it goes against their moral beliefs (Harris, 981).

The Right to Abortion On January 22, 1973, in a 7-2 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down it’s landmark decision in the case of Roe v. Wade, which recognized that the constitutional right to privacy extends to a woman’s right to make her own personal medical decisions — including the decision to have an abortion without interference from politicians (Planned Parenthood). There are many moments in history when Roe v. Wade has been so close to being overturned, yet it is still in place. Abortion should stay legal, or not overturned, for the health of women everywhere. First, this important case took place at the time of abortion being illegal in most states, including Texas, where Roe v. Wade began.

As a woman, I believe that my rights should not be determined by some man in Washington DC. Instead, everyone should be entitled to their own opinion. Abortions and contraceptives are not procedures or medications that women usually advertise and frankly, it is none of government’s business what women choose to do with their own bodies. They are not the property of men or the

With almost half the nation divided among their views, abortion remains one of the most controversial topics in our society. Since Roe v. Wade, our views in society as well as following court cases have been progressing toward the woman’s right to choose. The precedent set by Roe v. Wade made the Supreme Court acknowledge that it cannot rule specifically when life begins and it also affirms that it is the woman’s right to have an abortion under the 14th Amendment. In the 1st Amendment, the Establishment Clause forbids the government from passing laws “which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another”. Many Christian pro-lifers use their religious beliefs to dispute when life begins.

The perfect example of this issue is the Hobby Lobby case (Source #1). The issue started after the company refused to provide healthcare for their employees that support abortions. The government immediately stepped in even though it was the company 's religious beliefs. This decision should have been left to the church. The Hobby Lobby company has the right as a Christian ran business, to refuse any non-biblical procedures the government is trying to force upon

56. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989): The Court upheld Missouri restrictions on abortions that “public employees and public facilities were not to be used in performing or assisting abortions unnecessary to save the mother 's life; encouragement and counseling to have abortions was prohibited; and physicians were to perform viability tests upon women in their twentieth (or more) week of pregnancy.” It was a fractured decision that seemed to contradict Roe v. Wade but the court decided to not revisit any parts of Roe v. Wade after this case. The Missouri restrictions did not violate the right to privacy or the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Annotated Bibliography "Abortion ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2016.

By removing this support, women who choose or have chosen abortion now feel as though they are the ones in the wrong, not the law. There is no doubt this law was set in place in hopes women would feel guilty and change their minds about abortion. Even if the women still choose to abort after this, they will feel more uncomfortable and ashamed about their