Why Obamacare's contraception coverage requirement is still up for debate

A federal appeals court in St. Louis ruled on Thursday that the healthcare legislation's provision on providing contraception to workers through an outside insurer infringed on the rights of religiously-affiliated employers.

Elise Amendola/AP/File
Pharmacist Simon Gorelikov holds a generic emergency contraceptive at the Health First Pharmacy in Boston, May 2, 2013.

The Affordable Care Act’s mandate that employers have to provide health insurance that covers contraception to their employees violates the employers religious freedom, even if they don't have to pay for it, a federal appeals court said on Thursday.

The decision, by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis, marks a break with other appeals courts that have considered the issue of balancing religious freedom with providing contraceptive and other preventative care to workers.

It puts the the court more in line with the US Supreme Court’s controversial Hobby Lobby ruling from June 2014, where the court held 5 to 4 that the Affordable Care Act violated laws protecting religious freedom by requiring profit-making corporations to provide contraceptives to their employees.

The Obama administration had created a workaround for employees interested in seeking contraception by crafting a rule that allows companies to opt out of paying for such services by petitioning the Department of Health and Human Services. Under the rule, the government can then connect the employee to a private insurer at no additional cost to the company.

Employers have previously filed suits alleging that the opt-out process violates their rights by making them indirectly complicit in providing contraception to workers, but previous appeals court have rejected that argument.

This time, however, was different. The court must defer to employers “sincere religious belief that their participation in the accommodation process makes them morally and spiritually complicit in providing abortifacient coverage,” wrote Judge Roger Wollman, using a term that usually refers to drugs which induce abortions.

Unlike the decision regarding Hobby Lobby, which is a for-profit corporation, Thursday’s ruling came on behalf of several non-profit religious-affiliated colleges and service providers. One ruling was for Heartland Christian College in Newark, Mo., and the addiction services provider CNS International Ministries Inc, also based in Missouri; the other came on behalf of Dordt College and Cornerstone University, both based in Iowa.

The employers said the Affordable Care Act’s opt-out provision violates the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which states that “governments should not substantially burden religious exercise without compelling justification.”

This report contains material from Reuters.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.