Becket Fund
Federal appeals court grants Hobby Lobby’s request to speed court case
Associated Press
March 30, 2013
A federal appeals court in Denver has granted Hobby Lobby Stores Inc.'s request for the entire court to hear its legal challenge over part of the Affordable Care Act that requires the company to cover emergency contraceptives for its employees. Typically, appeals cases are heard by a panel of three judges, but Hobby Lobby had asked the full court to hear the case - a request that federal appeals courts seldom grant, said Kyle Duncan, general counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which is defending Hobby Lobby in its lawsuit.
Employers challenging health law contraceptive provision
Washington Post
January 20, 2013
At the same time, "the business cases are moving quickly," said Kyle Duncan, general counsel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, one of the groups coordinating the challenges to the law. By Duncan's count, there are 14 cases filed by business owners who say the law forces them to choose between running their companies and following their religious beliefs. In nine of those cases, courts have issued injunctions until the conflicts can be decided on their merits.
Obama Administration: Business owners have no religious freedom rights
Breitbart
October 29, 2012
Lori Windham, Senior Counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the non-profit, public interest law firm that represents Hobby Lobby, said, "The Green family is asking to continue to live their faith by not paying for drugs that might cause abortions." Windham charged that the DOJ is claiming "that the Greens must comply- and pay for abortion-causing drugs- or pay millions of dollars in fines."
Windham observes that the Obama administration has already exempted others from health plans, yet it is forcing a family-owned business to violate the tenets of that family's faith.
Illinois cannot make pharmacists give 'morning after' pill: court
Reuters
September 21, 2012
An Illinois appellate court Friday affirmed a lower court finding that the state cannot force pharmacies and pharmacists to sell emergency contraceptives - also known as "morning after pills" - if they have religious objections. "This decision is a great victory for religious freedom," said Mark Rienzi, senior counsel for the Becket Fund, quoted in a statement about the decision.
Wheaton College suit prompts change in contraception ‘safe harbor’
Chicago Daily Herald
August 17, 2012
Hannah Smith, senior counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which is representing Wheaton College and The Catholic University of America in the jointly filed suit, said, "They have rewritten the guidelines so that the 'safe harbor' says if you took measures before Feb. 10, 2012, to correct any inadvertent coverage of these contraceptive drugs, these abortion-inducing drugs, then you will still qualify for the 'safe harbor.'"
The HHS Mandate: Not an Academic Debate
National Review commentary by K.J. Lopez
July 20, 2012
For Wheaton, the violation of conscience lies in the inclusion of abortion-inducing drugs in the HHS mandate — further evidence that at the heart of the debate is not access to contraception but the erosion of religious liberty. “We were surprised that the federal government is using the term ‘contraception’ to refer to drugs that are widely recognized as having an abortive effect,” Ryken explains. “The secretary of Health and Human Services has been on record publicly as saying these are drugs that prevent implantation of a fertilized egg."
An Evangelical-Catholic Stand on Liberty
Wall St. Journal commentary by P. Ryken and J. Garvey
July 19, 2012
On Wednesday, represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the trustees of Wheaton College joined The Catholic University of America in filing a lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services. They did so because the HHS mandate requiring the college to provide and subsidize insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs violates the conscience of the school and its members, and denies their First Amendment freedom of religion.
One HHS Mandate Case Dismissed, Don’t Read Too Much Into It
National Review Online commentary by Kyle Duncan
July 17, 2012
Today’s decision by a federal district court in Nebraska to dismiss one of the many pending lawsuits against the HHS abortion-drug, contraception and sterilization mandate is unfortunate (and in one respect, seriously mistaken). But the decision turns on technicalities and doesn’t decide the merits of the dispute. Bear this context in mind if you should hear anyone trumpeting this decision as some sort of “victory” for the federal government on the religious-liberty questions at the heart of the HHS mandate litigation.
What to expect post-ObamaCare ruling
One News Now
June 29, 2012
Dr. Gene Rudd, senior vice president of the Christian Medical Association (CMA), says the high court decision basically endorses the healthcare law, which will lead to a severe encroachment on the rights of conscience and the exercise of religion.
Religious Liberty Takes Center Stage
Daily News commentary by Mark Rienzi
June 29, 2012
Nothing in the court’s opinions directly addressed the religious-freedom challenges brought in the 23 lawsuits challenging the HHS mandate that all employers must provide insurance coverage for contraceptives, sterilization and drugs and devices that cause early abortions. In fact, every justice who voted to uphold the law was quite clear that Congress’ exercise of its taxing power remains subject to other constitutional guarantees like the right to religious freedom.
Individual Mandate Survives; Religious Liberty Challenges Move Forward
Becket Fund commentary
June 28, 2012
“The Becket Fund’s religious liberty lawsuits against the unconstitutional HHS mandate will continue,” said Hannah Smith, Senior Counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. “Never in history has there been a mandate forcing individuals to violate their deeply held religious beliefs or pay a severe fine, a fine which could force many homeless shelters, charities, and religious institutions to shut their doors.”
How Will the Supreme Court's Decision Impact the HHS Mandate?
Becket Fund analysis
June 18, 2012
The Supreme Court will soon decide the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act. How does this impact the HHS lawsuits? This graphic illustrates the three different scenarios.
Good for religion, good for America
New York Times commentary by Mark Rienzi
May 10, 2012
Our nation has often benefited from religious individuals and institutions who were free to bring their religious perspective into the public square, whether by arguing for fair labor laws, advocating better treatment for immigrants, or providing food, shelter and health care to those in need. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and our civil rights movement often made expressly religious calls for the equal treatment of African-Americans.
Will the Obamacare Decision Affect the HHS Mandate?
National Review Online commentary by Mark Rienzi
April 2, 2012
Last week's Supreme Court arguments over the Affordable Care Act focused on the constitutionality of the individual mandate and the expanded Medicaid entitlement. Could those cases also affect the religious-liberty lawsuits challenging the HHS abortion/sterilization/contraception mandate, which are now pending in many federal district courts? The short answer is: Maybe.
Court says pharmacists can’t be forced to dispense morning-after pill
Washington Post
February 22, 2012
"Today's decision sends a very clear message: No individual can be forced out of her profession solely because of her religious beliefs," said Luke Goodrich, deputy national litigation director at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. Read Court opinion.
