Sotomayor refuses to block morning-after pill rule

US Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Sonia Sotomayor during a press conference in San Salvador on August 16, 2011. / Jose CABEZAS/AFP/Getty Images

WASHINGTON Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor on Wednesday denied a request to block part of the federal health care law that requires employee health-care plans to provide insurance coverage for the morning-after pill and similar emergency contraception pills.

Hobby Lobby Stores and a sister company, Mardel Inc., sued the government, claiming the mandate violates the religious beliefs of its owners.

In an opinion, Sotomayor said the stores fail to satisfy the demanding legal standard for blocking the requirement on an emergency basis. She said the companies may continue their challenge to the regulations in the lower courts.

Company officials say they must decide whether to violate their faith or face a daily $1.3 million fine beginning Jan. 1 if they ignore the law.

Attorneys for the government have said the drugs do not cause abortions and that the U.S. has a compelling interest in mandating insurance coverage for them.

In ruling against the companies last month, U.S. District Judge Joe Heaton said churches and other religious organizations have been granted constitutional protection from the birth-control provisions but that "Hobby Lobby and Mardel are not religious organizations."

[ObamaYoMama]

It's about fiscal responsibility. Use birth control and avoid the future expense of bringing another unwanted child into this world. Isn't fiscal responsibility what the right wing is all about? Oh, wait, the right was in charge when we ran up all of this debt. I know, we need another tax cut, that will fix everything...

[dranyamelknur]

How does this pill interfere with your right to not use it if you don't want to? If you are Jewish, is your faith interfered with if I eat pork, or some parents do not circumcise their son
Furthermore, it is used the day after intercourse before we can possibley know if a conception has occurred. Therefore, chances are good that it did not end the life of a tiny microscopic piece of matter.
Furthermore, we are largely secular but we are still willing to let you who are not perform your bizarre rituals. Just don't expect us to have to do so also.

[alanrobisch]

We are as a country becoming a secular socialist state and from what I can figure out the secular humanists in this group feel that the majority or at least the party in power has the right to violate the consciences of the minority because they are ignorant louts who deserve any protections and that any intelligent secular progressive knows that any opposition to abortion is only from those ignorant louts and that their is no logical opposition to abortion on demand. I thought the idea of liberal that the minority rights should be protected but I guess that is only if they agree with the minority

[chilean11-2009]

Nobody forces anybody to use the morning-after pill. But for those whom by personal decision will use it, they should be provided with the insurance coverage as mandated by law. Not everyone working at Hobby Lobby or Mardel have the same religious beliefs and they are not doing anything illegal.

[ObamaYoMama]

The minority does not have the right to restrict the rights of the majority. Just plain logic...

[epluribus22]

$1.3 million a day--That is definitely cruel and unusual punishment!!!

[john92021]

should be a mandatory water additive on the entire planet.

[superstardust]

why should a business be forced to pay for elective health products? BIRTH CONTROL IS NOT ESSENTIAL. this government mandate is out of control and is forcing people to join a health care system that is likely to be a monopoly from leading pharm. companies.

anyone wonder why pfizer and merk stock went through the roof after obamacare was passed? BECAUSE THEY NO LONGER HAVE TO COMPETE. Their products are now guaranteed to sale through the government-regulated healthcare system (NOT RUN!). trading greedy insurance companies for greedy corporations. the government btw will not be issuing the healthcare or overseeing it like the NHS in britain. the government merely forces americans to pay into a system that will only benefit a minority of the population.

americans who have paid for their healthcare in dollars, while maintaining catastrophic insurance, are being railroaded. they are losing their catastrophic insurance and forced to join obamacare. these people PAY FOR THEIR HEALTHCARE 100%, and now they must pay more for less?

of course politicians wont be subject to obamacare.

[vjillh]

In what universe is birth control not essential? Now viagra, _that_ is truly an elective health product!

[alanrobisch]

Abortifacients are not necessary health care it is a form of abortion. Birth control is not health care it is a form that allows a women to be sexually active with out conceiving. they are almost free and can be gotten readily available for those who can't pay for them but the federal govt now is the arbiter of all things healthcare and have taken that to mean they can force people to violate their consciences because they are now the bosses. We the people have surrender more freedom in the name of free(LOL) health care for those without insurance.

[epluribus22]

Hobby Lobby should simply add chapels to their stores and sell merchandise as part of the church's thrift strore. Case closed

[epluribus22]

Too bad that Sotomayor's mother did not take the pill!

[Think4times]

Aww cry a river because religion doesn't trump the law

Waaahhhhhh

[alanrobisch]

Religion in the sense of the exercise thereof does sorry but sotomayor loves big govt so she doesn't care about the first amendment which requires the free exercise of religion. Within most laws including paying social security taxes there is a religious exemption. pastors for example are not required to pay social security taxes. the secularist such as Obama are anti religious and feel whatever they do religion is less important than their ideology. Interestingly auto unions were given waivers from Obama care but not people with religious beliefs Wow talk about political expediency. Also there is a religious exemption but the govt claims this company doesn't deserve it Why who knows. There backers are secular so religious objections come the people that do not support them so they have no political reason to cut them a break.

[properoldlady]

It is so sad to see our country, founded on the freedom of religion and the separation of church and state, to now have EMPLOYERS decide the religious and related healthcare choices for women. Would they also like to go back to the days when you could put scarlet letters on a woman's forehead, just to prove that THEIR church and THEIR beliefs have more power? So sad. We are behind in education worldwide. Now these folk want to teach religion as science, and tell women which religious beliefs women (not men) must abide by. Just sad (and scarey)

[Lindag20]

Lucky: the employees of these businesses didn't join a CHURCH when they went to work there. The owners of the business have no right to pick and chose what medical services their employees are allowed to receive as part of their health insurance.

[alanrobisch]

nor does the govt they shouldn't be in this but the obamacare is taking freedom away from the people but you obama supporters can't see beyond the tip of their own nose. There is a famous quotation about the failure of germans to prevent the suppression of the rights of others and when it became their turn to lose their rights no one was left to stop it. You may see someday what that means when you lose something because of arbitrary decisions by govt beaucracy and have no recourse

[recowger]

Oh! Soto Baby! You forgot to put this in the Obamacare package. We need to do just like they do in Kenya: Kenya hospital imprisons new mothers with no money

Read more: http://www.myfoxorlando.com/story/20432143/kenya-hospital-imprisons-new-mothers-with-no-money#ixzz2GIOGYk7f

Let's just get it right.