By Jennifer Brinker | email@example.com | twitter: @jenniferbrinker
The right of Americans to live out their faith in the public square is paramount to Missouri's new attorney general, Josh Hawley.
Hawley has firsthand experience in defending religious liberty as an attorney with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which sucessfully defended Hobby Lobby before the U.S. Supreme Court in its landmark lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services several years ago.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court's June 30 ruling that certain businesses, based on their religious objections, can be exempted from a government requirement to include contraceptives in their employee health insurance coverage means "justice has prevailed," in the words of two U.S. archbishops.
The U.S. Constitution does not permit federal courts or government officials to be the ultimate arbiters of matters of faith.
Today, the government is seeking to transform the Religious Freedom Restoration Act's substantial burden analysis -- allowing for intrusion only in the "interests of the highest order" -- into what attorneys for the U.S. bishops call "an exercise in amateur moral theology."
WASHINGTON -- Oral arguments in two cases before the U.S. Supreme Court March 25 focused on whether for-profit corporations have religious grounds to object to the new health care law's requirement that most employers provide contraceptive coverage in their employee health plans.
Crowds on both sides of the issue gathered outside the Supreme Court on a cold, snowy morning, holding aloft signs and chanting for their cause.
Next month, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in two cases related to the Affordable Care Act and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' mandate that most employers provide coverage for contraceptives in employee health plans.
The arguments in Sebelius vs. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties vs. Sebelius will be heard jointly beginning March 25. The cases focus on how the mandate applies to for-profit companies. It's a shift from previous debate about whether Church-affiliated institutions may be exempted.
After ruling in 2012 that certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act stand up to constitutional scrutiny, the Supreme Court's next dip into legal challenges to the law focuses on whether for-profit secular employers can claim religious rights protections from some provisions.