WebProNews

Tag: Hobby Lobby

  • Hobby Lobby Ruling Used by Gitmo Detainees

    As if it weren’t enough that every armchair pundit in the United States is prognosticating about the unintended far-reaching effects of the Supreme Court ruling in the Hobby Lobby case, here comes the sworn enemy of the United States to weigh in on the debate.

    Lawyers for detainees at Guantanamo Bay are using the Hobby Lobby ruling in support of arguments for their clients, terrorist detainees. The detainees have previously complained that their freedom to worship is infringed upon by conditions at Gitmo. However the courts have ruled that Gitmo detainees are nonresident aliens. Therefore, the protections of the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act (RFRA) afforded to U.S. citizens — and now to corporations, thanks to the Hobby Lobby ruling — are not applicable to them.

    Given the Hobby Lobby ruling, the detainees are trying once again to get some recognition of themselves as “persons”, and therefore have the RFRA applied to them. Their attorneys submitted a filing to that end.

    “Hobby Lobby makes clear that all persons—human and corporate, citizen and foreigner, resident and alien—enjoy the special religious free exercise protections of the RFRA,” the filing reads. “Guantanamo Bay detainees, as flesh-and-blood human beings, are surely ‘individuals,’ and thus are no less ‘person[s]‘ than are the for-profit corporations in Hobby Lobby or the resident noncitizens whom Hobby Lobby gives as an example of persons to whom the RFRA must apply.”

    “Thus, Hobby Lobby puts it beyond reasonable dispute that, as ‘person[s]‘ protected by the RFRA, Guantanamo Bay detainees enjoy rights of religious free exercise, including the right to pray in congregation.”

    The detainees have filed a motion asking for the court to order military personnel to allow communal prayer during Ramadan.

    Guantanamo detainees have been staging hunger strikes for years over what they see as abuses of their religious traditions.

    Image via YouTube

  • Sonia Sotomayor Rips Court a New One

    Sonia Sotomayor Rips Court a New One

    The dust from the “Hobby Lobby” ruling at the Supreme Court has not even settled yet, and the next SCOTUS scandal is already hitting the ground.

    In the landmark case involving the Affordable Care Act, certain forms of contraception, and whether corporations can claim religious differences that exempt them from following the law of the land, the Court handed down a ruling that divided the country sharply. Through the loads of misinformation on both sides of the issue, the Court sought to allay fears that their decision would have far-ranging consequences. They assured the public that their stance was only applicable to “closely-held” corporations.

    The IRS defines closely-held corporations this way:

    Generally, a closely held corporation is a corporation that:

    * Has more than 50% of the value of its outstanding stock owned (directly or indirectly) by 5 or fewer individuals at any time during the last half of the tax year; and
    * Is not a personal service corporation.

    In her dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said, “In a decision of startling breadth, the Court holds that commercial enterprises, including corporations, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, can opt out of any law (saving only tax laws) they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs.” She said the Court had “ventured into a minefield,” and that her dissent was because she was “mindful of the havoc the Court’s judgment can introduce.”

    Now, mere days removed from that case, the Court has expanded on its decision, just as Ginsburg feared.

    The new development is a case where Wheaton College objects to having to fill out a simple form for the Department of Health and Human Services, which would exempt them from providing the contraception in question. The form is simple; one page, front and back. You can see it here. The College says that the act of having to fill out a form burdens their religious freedom. They see it as making them “complicit in the provision of contraceptive coverage, in violation of [their] religious beliefs.”

    Churches do not have to fill out the form. Thus, non-profits like Wheaton are asking to be treated as churches.

    The Court agreed, and said that Wheaton did not have to fill out the form.

    This time, it was Justice Sonia Sotomayor who took the heat to the five male justices who made that call. In a dissent coming from all three female justices, she said the Court had assured the American public that their decision only affected certain types of companies, but now they were going back on their word.

    “Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe they can take us at our word,” Justice Sotomayor wrote. “Not so today.”

    “After expressly relying on the availability of the religious-nonprofit accommodation to hold that the contraceptive coverage requirement violates [the Religious Freedom Restoration Act] as applied to closely held for-profit corporations, the Court now, as the dissent in Hobby Lobby feared it might, retreats from that position.”

    The fears that the Hobby Lobby ruling would sprawl to include other organizations, even to the extent of telling companies not to even bother with the paperwork of the law that would make them exempt, appear to be coming to pass.

    Keep in mind that it was Sotomayor who temporarily blocked the contraceptive provision in the first place, as seen in this news story. So this is not about birth control, it is about Supreme Court decision creep.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Megyn Kelly Holds No Punches; Now No. 1 News Show

    Megyn Kelly Holds No Punches; Now No. 1 News Show

    For the past 150 consecutive months, Fox News has ruled the ratings roost, being the most watched news program on cable television. For the grand majority of those years, Bill O’Reilly has led the charge for the “fair and balanced” news station. However, O’Reilly has a new challenger, and she shows no signs of holding back.

    For the second time in her show’s existence, Megyn Kelly has surpassed Bill O’Reilly in the cable news wars, bringing in 413,000 viewers in the 25-54 age demographic compared to O’Reilly’s 402,000. This past week was the first time Kelly had directly beaten O’Reilly, however, as her previous victory came when O’Reilly had someone else filling his chair.

    If one has not tuned into Fox News to watch The Kelly File, one may be confused as to how a woman on a conservative media station has risen to such prominence in less than a year. The answer lies in Kelly’s aggressive beliefs and on-screen personality.

    In a recent interview with former Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers, Kelly held no punches, asking Ayers questions many would never dream to utter in such a politically correct age, such as “How many bombings are you responsible for?” and “What would it take to make you bomb this country again?”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53R8ky14VKA

    While Kelly could have never expected to get the answers she wanted from Ayers, she was able to twist the interview to something useful for Fox News – a slam piece against Barack Obama. Throughout the interview, Kelly constantly hearkened back to the supposed relationship between Bill Ayers and Barack Obama in Chicago during the 60’s and 70’s, despite the fact that both men deny having a close relationship at any point in time. Kelly also seemingly wanted to insinuate a friendly relationship between Obama and al Qaeda, referring to Ayers as both Osama bin Laden and Adolf Hitler during the interview.

    Kelly’s tactics aren’t reserved for strictly political issues, however. Recently, she also attacked Sandra Fluke for her comments on the Supreme Court Hobby Lobby case.

    On MSNBC Sunday night, Fluke told Chris Matthews that “What this [the Hobby Lobby ruling] is really about at its base is trying to figure out as many ways as possible to limit women’s access to reproductive healthcare.” Apparently, Kelly did not appreciate Fluke’s statement, going on a diatribe defending the stance of Hobby Lobby and its owners:

    She [Fluke] doesn’t know what she’s talking about… So it’s a lot of corporations that could be affected, but only those who feel strongly about their religious beliefs. Those folks aren’t going to have to provide abortion-related drugs: drugs that terminate an already-fertilized egg. That’s the only — out of 20 birth-control drugs that are available, they still have to cover 16. They just said we don’t want to fund those forms of birth control that end a fertilized egg…

    Women were buying their own [birth control]; for the past 20 years and beyond, they’ve been buying their own. And then what happened was we passed Obamacare. And then Kathleen Sebelius had some of her HHS minions go down in the basement and write a regulation that said as part of Obamacare, you have to cover 20 out of 20 birth-control drugs — 20 out of 20.

    And then women like Sandra Fluke started saying, ‘I’m entitled. Oh my God, I didn’t realize how victimized I was all those years when I was paying for it on my own.’ And Hobby Lobby, which is an evangelical company, came out and said, ‘Alright, we’ll do it, we’ll do it for all of it except four that end a fertilized egg.

    Whether one appreciates Kelly’s hard interview tactics and personal vehemence or not, one thing is for certain – As long as Fox News continues to give shows to big personalities who are willing to look a bit ridiculous in order to pull ratings, it will continue to rule the cable news scene for quite some time. (Especially with the retirement of Stephen Colbert.)

    Image via YouTube

  • Hobby Lobby’s Divisive SCOTUS Win

    Hobby Lobby’s Divisive SCOTUS Win

    The Supreme Court case that featured Hobby Lobby and their protest against Obamacare wrapped up with a Hobby Lobby win yesterday. Within minutes your Facebook and Twitter feeds probably blew up with statements of indignation or triumph, depending on where your friends came down on the issue.

    Unfortunately, much of what you see tossed around out there is probably just as confusing as it ever was. Bear with me as we try to make sense out of what happened and what it could mean in the future.

    One of the statements that is getting tossed around is that Hobby Lobby wanted to be able to refuse to pay for all contraceptives for its female employees. This is not the case, though the ruling may leave that possibility open.

    There are 20 forms of contraceptive that are covered under the Affordable Care Act. Of these 20, Hobby Lobby has issue with only four that they considered “abortifacients.” These four treatments are different from the other 16 due to the fact that they may prevent an already fertilized egg (a “conception”) from implanting and growing. These four include Plan B, Ella, as well as copper and hormonal IUDs.

    Hobby Lobby’s contention was that, since they believe that life begins at conception, these four treatments cause de facto abortions. The medical community at large does not consider these treatments to be abortions, since their definition of viability must include the implant stage.

    The Supreme Court’s decision came down to the fact that the owners of Hobby Lobby and other businesses believe that life begins at a different point than most doctors do. Therefore, this became a religious issue.

    Opponents of this position say that this decision is a slippery slope that could cause many other issues of a religious nature, even some that have not yet been thought of, to become major headaches. These may not even be in the healthcare realm.

    One example that has been proffered is: What if a business owned by a Jehovah’s Witness, who believes that use of blood products are forbidden in the Bible, says that they should not be forced to cover life-saving transfusions or hemophiliac treatments, even for non-Witness employees?

    This was an example used by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in her dissent from the 5-4 decision. She went on to ask:

    “Would the exemption…extend to employers with religiously grounded objections to blood transfusions (Jehovah’s Witnesses); antidepressants (Scientologists); medications derived from pigs, including anesthesia, intravenous fluids, and pills coated with gelatin (certain Muslims, Jews, and Hindus); and vaccinations[?]…Not much help there for the lower courts bound by today’s decision.”

    The Court’s decision is designed to be narrow and limited only to “closely-held corporations” — which comprise most of the businesses in the United States. MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow acknowledged this in her commentary on the ruling.

    “The justices in the majority, they went out of their way to say that your religious objections can only get you out of this one part of this one law,” she said. “They said specifically that only contraception laws are subject to religious beliefs. Other laws aren’t.”

    Even so, many on both sides of the issue say that the genie is out of the bottle and there will be further effects.

    “Justice Ginsburg is right — this is sweeping,” said Jonathan Turley, law professor at George Washington University. “People should not get lost in the reference to ‘closely held corporations.’ These types of businesses are huge in this country and most of the businesses people relate with in their daily lives. We’re still working out the details of how far that goes. … That’s what’s going to happen here. It is a significant game changer.”

    On the other side of the aisle, Lori Windham, senior counsel with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty said, “This case is about the freedoms of all Americans — women and men — and it’s something that all Americans should celebrate today.”

    Image via YouTube

  • Hey Twitter, the Hobby Lobby Ruling Isn’t SCOTUSblog’s Fault

    SCOTUSblog is a private blog, sponsored by Bloomberg Law, that’s “devoted to comprehensively covering the U.S. Supreme Court without bias and according to the highest journalistic and legal ethical standards.” It’s one of the most-respected sources for Supreme Court coverage and analysis. It has its own Twitter account.

    The Supreme Court, yesterday, made a controversial 5-4 ruling in a case known to many as the ‘Hobby Lobby’ case. Using 1993’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the majority decided that closely held corporations aren’t required to provide contraceptive coverage for employees. Unsurprisingly, this pissed a lot of people off. The Supreme Court does not operate a Twitter account (because that would be ridiculous).

    I can see some of you are ahead of me.

    Angry folks took to Twitter to vent, thinking they were blasting The Supreme Court’s official Twitter account – @SCOTUSblog.

    They weren’t, of course. But that didn’t stop SCOTUSblog from having a lot of fun. They spent hours responding to dozens upon dozens of misdirected hostilities.

    Ah, a call to action:

    And then things hit a whole other level when people started catching on to what @SCOTUSblog was doing.

    And finally…

    Just FYI, the Twitter bio for @SCOTUSblog reads “A private blog about the Supreme Court of the U.S.”

  • Hobby Lobby Invests in Abortion Pills

    In a discovery that is bound to rankle supporters, Mother Jones magazine revealed yesterday that Hobby Lobby is in bed with the enemy.

    After months/years of fighting the Affordable Care Act’s provisions requiring birth control to be covered by employer-provided insurance plans, including taking that fight all the way to the United States Supreme Court, it now comes to light that the company may not know where its money goes.

    In fact, it turns out that Hobby Lobby’s corporate 401(k) plan has more than $73 Million in mutual funds investments in companies that produce the very drugs and devices that they are fighting against. These include emergency contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, and drugs commonly used in abortions.

    Mother Jones reported:

    “These companies include Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, which makes Plan B and ParaGard, a copper IUD, and Actavis, which makes a generic version of Plan B and distributes Ella … Pfizer, the maker of Cytotec and Prostin E2, which are used to induce abortions … AstraZeneca, which … manufactures Prostodin, Cerviprime, and Partocin, three drugs commonly used in abortions; and Forest Laboratories, which makes Cervidil, a drug used to induce abortions.”

    Many people don’t know exactly what is in their 401(k) mutual fund sections. That is the nature of a mutual fund: it is managed by someone else so you don’t have to pick what you are investing in. But a company that is so ardently fighting this battle should have had someone who knows how to see such things – like the someone that Mother Jones has – to check.

    Some folks have argued that Hobby Lobby’s assertions about so-called “morning after” and “Plan B” pills are unfounded, that they have a mistaken understanding about how these things work. But there is no accounting for a person’s opinions. If Hobby Lobby wanted to fight for its religious right to not pay for aspirin because they viewed headaches as God’s will, we would still be at the Supreme Court with this case. That is the nature of a religious liberty argument. It does not have to make sense to anyone else but the person making the argument.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Kamala Harris Against Corporate Religious Claims

    Attorney General Kamala Harris is in the middle of the battle between corporations and their religious freedoms, and the administration and its Affordable Care act. She previously filed a request for the Supreme Court to review whether for-profit businesses can deny coverage for contraceptives under the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). The cases of such businesses as Hobby Lobby, a biblically-founded family business, could have a huge impact on the course in which Obamacare continues to go.

    Approximately 40 companies have sued, according to Fox News, stating that covering all or even some forms of birth control would violate their religious freedom rights. The issue has completely divided the lower courts, and caused a huge bump in the road for the new healthcare law. A decision could be made as early as Tuesday after closed-door meetings between the justices take place to decide whether or not to take on the controversial topic.

    Should they decide to move forward with it, arguments could begin as early as March with a decision being made in June.

    The Obama administration is worried that the victory for businesses like Hobby Lobby, could be used as “a sword used to deny employees of for-profit commercial enterprises the benefits and protections of generally applicable laws.” Kamala Harris has been a major voice in the fight against employers who claim religious freedom violations in the new Affordable Care Act. She to Twitter last week to express her disdain for the situation.

    Four years ago, the Supreme Court expanded the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 to enable corporations to invoke the same rights as individuals in religious freedom matters. Time will tell if that argument can stand up against the Obama administration.

    Image via wikimedia commons

  • Seth Rogen: Hobby Lobby, “The Interview”, “…The End”

    Seth Rogen may well rank among the busiest guys in Hollywood. This week, the star is grabbing the headlines over Hobby Lobby turmoil, casting for his new film and the DVD release of his hit, This Is The End.

    For his Twitter followers, Rogen is keeping the arts and crafts big box store Hobby Lobby in the hot seat over accusations of anti-Semitism. The turmoil apparently started over an offensive comment made by an employee, for which the company has apologized, and a distinct lack of merchandise celebrating or supporting the Jewish faith, for which the company is promising test market items in New York and New Jersey, according to the Hobby Lobby Facebook page.

    S Rogen Tweet

    Capitalizing yet again on his Freaks and Geeks network, Rogen and James Franco are taking the lead in a new Sony comedy, The Interview, and as of this week they may recruit another alumnus, Lizzy Caplan, who is in talks to play the female lead. The Interview, written and directed by Rogen and Evan Goldberg, embroils a talk show host (Franco) and his producer (Rogen) in a plot of international intrigue and assassinations. Caplan is slated to play a steamy CIA agent who schemes for Franco to kill the prime minister of North Korea.

    This project comes off Rogen’s directorial debut, This Is the End, which nabbed over $100 million at box offices (somewhat helped by a re-release). The apocalypse comedy is just out in stores and Rogen is promoting the outtakes, available at YouTube. Please note, the content is not appropriate for all audiences.

    Rogen and Goldberg have been long-time writing partners, penning Superbad (2007) and Pineapple Express (2008). The duo is also developing an R-rated animated film, Sausage Party, which Goldberg boasts (one presumes, tongue-in-cheek), “I’m going to confidently say it’s the most important film ever produced… It will change the world, like the movie ‘Ghandi.’”

    [Image via Seth Rogen official Twitter.]