JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
PAPER CHASE NEWSBURSTDigest RSS feedFull RSS feed
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.


Thursday, July 26, 2012

Advocacy group asks federal judge to block controversial employer insurance mandate
Rebecca DiLeonardo at 1:49 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Thomas More Law Center [advocacy website] on Wednesday filed a motion [text, PDF; press release] in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan [official website] asking the court to block a controversial employer insurance mandate, issued by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) [official website], that is scheduled to go into effect on August 1. The mandate in question [HHS press release] was added to the Patient Protection and Affordable Healthcare Act (PPACA) [text] and requires nearly all health insurance plans to cover all FDA-approved drugs, including contraception, sterilization and Plan-B-type drugs, with a narrow exception for some religious institutions. The exception only applies to organizations whose mission is strictly religious in nature and thus will not exempt Catholic schools, hospitals or universities. The Thomas More Law Center filed a lawsuit [press release] challenging the HHS mandate in May, alleging the requirement violates the First Amendment [text] right to religious freedom. The motion seeks a temporary injunction blocking enforcement of the law until the case is decided in federal court.

The HHS mandate has raised concerns in religiously affiliated institutions across the country. There are currently 24 separate lawsuits challenging the mandate. Last week, Wheaton College [official website], a Christian institution in Illinois, filed a lawsuit [press release] challenging the HHS mandate. In May, more than 40 Catholic dioceses and other Catholic institutions around the US filed lawsuits [JURIST report] against the Obama administration alleging the mandate violated their right to religious freedom. In a statement, the Archdiocese of Washington, DC, said that the lawsuit was not about access to contraception, but rather "it is about whether the government may force religious institutions and individuals to facilitate and fund services which violate their religious beliefs."




Link |  | print | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | Facebook page

For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...


LATEST LEGAL NEWS

 UK judge upholds request to withhold evidence in Russian spy death investigation
5:26 PM ET, May 19

 Afghanistan parliament blocks women's rights legislation
4:06 PM ET, May 19

 Cameroon authorities urged to drop charges against transgender youths
11:45 AM ET, May 19

 click for more...

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!

LATEST FORUM

In Alabama, "Back Door" Restrictions on Abortion and Roe
DOMESTIC
LaJuana Davis
Cumberland School of Law

ABOUT

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.

CONTACT

Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org