What the ObamaCare ruling means for the HHS mandate
Tags
Related Posts
About the author
The U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding ObamaCare (while declaring it constitutional under Congress’s power to tax rather than its power to regulate interstate commerce) has largely been greeted by Catholics with a shrug of their shoulders. The general attitude is summed up by Mark Shea: “the central issue (as far as I am concerned) remains to be tested: Catholic conscience and the damnable HHS mandate.”
As much as I hate to disagree with my friend Mark, I’m afraid that yesterday’s ruling means that the prospects for any compromise over, or outright reversal of, the Obama administration’s contraception mandate are growing dim. As I pointed out in my first post on the Fortnight for Freedom, if all or most of the ObamaCare legislation had been declared unconstitutional, the HHS mandate would have fallen with it.
The flip side is that, now that ObamaCare has been found constitutional, the administration has received a political boost that it will use to press its case on the contraception mandate. Between now and the presidential election in November, President Obama has no need to try to compromise on this issue—and, indeed, any attempt at compromise that he might try to make would hurt his electoral prospects among those voters most in favor of both ObamaCare and the HHS mandate. Such voters are, in fact, the core of his support; he would be foolish to do anything to upset them now.
But it’s not all up to the administration; the U.S. Supreme Court will eventually rule on the contraception mandate itself. Does yesterday’s decision give us any indication how the Court will rule?
Directly, no. Indirectly, though, it may tell us a lot.
The best possible spin that can be put on Justice Roberts’ decision in the ObamaCare ruling is that he has deferred to Congress and the administration. His own opinion makes it clear that, as the legislation is written, the ObamaCare individual mandate (the requirement that everyone must purchase health insurance) is unconstitutional. And yet Roberts, along with the four most liberal justices on the Court (Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan), declared the legislation constitutional anyway, by finding another justification for the individual mandate in Congress’s power to “lay and collect Taxes.”
That tells us quite a bit about Chief Justice Roberts’ understanding of the role of the Supreme Court, and it gives us some clue as to how he may approach the contraception mandate. The four justices who joined Roberts in his decision are likely to vote to uphold the HHS mandate, and of the remaining justices Anthony Kennedy (a Catholic) is shaky at best. If Roberts decides to defer to Congress and the administration, even if he has to bend over backward to do so (as he did in the ObamaCare ruling), the Court could uphold the contraception mandate by a vote of 5-4 or 6-3.
Some bishops who gave qualified support to the Obama administration’s efforts at healthcare reform have, in the wake of the contraception mandate, expressed a sense of betrayal, and a few have even suggested that it may have been a mistake to support ObamaCare. Catholics who think that the two issues—the contraception mandate and the legislation that allowed the Obama administration to impose the contraception mandate—can be treated separately may be in for a rude awakening when the Court addresses the contraception mandate next term.
SOURCE
Leave a Comment
Photo Archive
-
Jun 18, 2013 10:28
Chaos as gunfire erupts at Utah Father’s day Mass
-
Jun 17, 2013 4:51
Obama names former CRS head ambassador to the Vatican
-
Jun 17, 2013 4:46
Addressing U.S., global child malnutrition a top priority for advocates
-
Jun 17, 2013 4:42
Female priests risk excommunication to be ordained
-
Jun 14, 2013 5:04
Catholic League president: ‘Nest of homosexual priests’ should be ‘rooted out’
-
Jun 14, 2013 5:01
Gay marriage little mentioned at faith confab
-
Jun 14, 2013 4:58
Vatican court denies latest appeal from Scituate church group
-
Jun 14, 2013 4:53
Conservatives to honor evangelist Pat Robertson as a trailblazer in faith, politics
-
Jun 13, 2013 1:41
Obama administration drops fight to limit age restrictions on Plan B
-
Jun 11, 2013 12:29
Bishops warn against changes in immigration bill that could kill it
14 Comments
Most adult Americans support the right to practice birth control. No employer Catholic or not have a right to force their employees to go along with their views. Ever hear of collective bargaining?
From CathNews’ “Disclaimer” page:
“The editors are charged with reflecting what the world is saying about Catholics and the Catholic religion. They distill the essence of the stories they choose with clarity and brevity and provide a link to the website upon which the story originally appeared. ”
Reprinting my column verbatim, while putting your byline (“by editorsub1″) on it, is not “distill[ing] the essence of the stor[y] . . . with clarity and brevity.” And providing a link to the original, after printing the entire thing in violation of copyright, is not enough to make it clear to readers that you did not write the piece.
Furthermore, on your Terms and Conditions page, you forbid your readers from doing with the articles that appear on CathNews exactly what you have done with my article:
2.3. Other than for the purpose of and subject to the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Law of the United States and similar statues that apply in your location, you may not, in any form or by any means:
(a) adapt, reproduce, broadcast, decompile, disassemble, download, copy, store, distribute, transmit, print, display, perform, publish or create derivative works from any part of this Website; or
(b) commercialize any information, products or services obtained from any part of this Website, without CathNewsUSA’s written permission.
2.4. You must not conduct, or participate in, the resale or commercial exploitation of the Website and any of its contents for any purpose.
Each time I leave you a comment,what comes up is that I have already said that. I rarely write a comment.
That’s because, Dr. Sarah, this website is slow — so if you press the “add comment” button a second time, you’ll get that message. I have gotten it myself.
Since when did contraception become a doctrine of the Church
Not exactly sure, Dr. Sarah — but since you incorrectly asserted that that group from Wisconsin is Catholic, I wouldn’t expect you to be familiar with this. Here is what paragraph 2363 of the Catechism says: “These two meanings or values of marriage (unity and procreation) cannot be separated without altering the couple’s spiritual life and compromising the goods of marriage and the future of the family.
addendum: the Catechism is available online at http://www.usccb.org
The group you incorrectly called Catholic, Dr. Sarah, was Call to Action. They are a very destructive group — masquerading as Catholic, and thus able to lead many uninformed and unsuspecting (and sinful) people astray.
Jim for a guy who only took a few courses in theology in college you have a very good handle on Theology although from the extreme right. Seriously are you in Opus Dei or the Legion of Christ or some other group like that?
Tony — no, I am not. However, I do a lot of reading, especially at Adoration, and I went to Catholic school for many many years. The most important thing for me is getting to Heaven, and helping as many others get there as I can. Nothing else really matters in the end. I hope you get to Heaven too, Tony — and if you do, the first round will be on me.
That was a round of beer, Tony — not a round in a boxing ring!
Eliminate Moles Warts Pores And Skin Tags With No Surgical Treatment
Dermatend Critiques On Elimination Of Skin Afflictions