1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

[Scotus] Hobby Lobby wins case

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by justtxyank, Jun 30, 2014.

  1. justtxyank

    justtxyank Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    41,905
    Likes Received:
    37,531
    I don't think you should decide cases based on whether your decision will bring further actions.

    A big part of the dissent was apparently that if a corporation has multiple owners that this decision could lead to a corporate dispute on how to proceed. That's a silly reason to rule on this. There are methods in place that allow corporations with multiple decision makers to reach final decisions in the case of gridlock. (Which the majority referenced)

    As for pursuing management's interest above employees, again, this was on a religious issue. The courts have always held religious issues to be pretty narrow. You can't argue religious reasons for wanting to avoid sexual harassment policies for example.
     
  2. glynch

    glynch Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    17,298
    Likes Received:
    3,060
    Hey, just doing what the Kochs tell them at the meetings they go to.
     
  3. rimrocker

    rimrocker Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    21,301
    Likes Received:
    5,769
    The other thing about the Hobby Lobby case is that we knew the verdict a long time ago. We knew the concept of closely held corporations did not originate with the con majority on the court and we knew it would be seized upon by Alito in his opinion. This was not based on law or precedent, but on the ideological views of the justices themselves. The opinion is just a rationalization which, unfortunately, is not merely in some column of wingnut agitprop, but is now the law of the land.
     
  4. tallanvor

    tallanvor Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    15,135
    Likes Received:
    5,087
    what? how is HL in their employee's medical issues?
     
  5. Bäumer

    Bäumer Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,548
    Likes Received:
    225
    ... by suing the government so that they don't have to cover birth control. I am pretty sure birth control could be considered a medical issue.
     
  6. Bäumer

    Bäumer Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,548
    Likes Received:
    225
    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/03/hobby-lobby-supreme-court-obamacare

    Why is this not surprising? Of course this is only about religion freedom right?
     
  7. juicystream

    juicystream Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2001
    Messages:
    28,619
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    The question should be whether or not insurance companies should be required to provide for that coverage (which I don't think they should).

    And I am a big fan of contraception, but I don't think insurance companies should have to pay for it, though I would assume it cost them less than pregnancies do.
     
  8. DwightHoward13

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    690
    Likes Received:
    20
    The ruling deals directly with only a small provision of Obamacare and will not take down the entire law but it amounts to a huge black eye for Obamacare, the administration and its backers. The justices have given Obamacare opponents their most significant political victory against the health care law, reinforcing their argument that the law and President Barack Obama are encroaching on Americans’ freedoms.

    It is not a win for Obama.

    Source: Politico
     
  9. Rocket River

    Rocket River Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 1999
    Messages:
    59,584
    Likes Received:
    26,912
    They have not right to be in their personal medical issue . .. but they should be forced to pay for them [i.e. provide insurance]. Correct?

    Rocket River
     
  10. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    40,319
    Likes Received:
    14,242
    The ruling agreed that the government has an interest in and a right to mandate contraception coverage. So it didn't consider that to be an encroachment on anyone's freedoms. It just didn't like the methodology and required a different one that already exists.

    Its a "political" win in the sense that it ruled against the administration. Liberals don't like it for that reason. But in terms of actual policy, it worked out just fine. At the end of the day, the government has the right to mandate contraception coverage and the employees of Hobby Lobby will get their coverage. From a "how it affects the average citizen" viewpoint, the admin got what they needed.

    A real loss for the Obama admin here would have been if SCOTUS ruled that the government does not have a compelling interest regards to regulating contraception coverage.
     
  11. tallanvor

    tallanvor Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    15,135
    Likes Received:
    5,087
    This makes no sense. By arguing that they shouldn't be forced to provide coverage for birth control, they are 'in their employee's medical issues'? HL has no idea what birth controls are/aren't being used by their employees. They are not 'in their employee's medical issues'. If anything they are trying to get out.
     
  12. justtxyank

    justtxyank Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    41,905
    Likes Received:
    37,531
    Yes, but no. It did rule that forcing a company to provide for certain contraceptive measures was an encroachment on the freedoms of those business owners.

    However, you are absolutely right that this has zero impact on average Americans. It's a very limited in scope ruling. Not sure why any Republicans are going to celebrate this like a defeat of ACA but they will.
     
  13. Bäumer

    Bäumer Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,548
    Likes Received:
    225
    An employer SUING to not cover a specific form of medication for their employees = staying out of their employees' medical issues? THAT makes no sense.

    To be fair here I can understand and respect an employer's desire to not cover these forms of medication. I just don't think "religious freedom" via the concept of corporate personhood should interfere with any form of medical treatment of employees.
     
  14. justtxyank

    justtxyank Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    41,905
    Likes Received:
    37,531
    It doesn't interfere with medical treatment. People are free to purchase whatever medication they want or get whatever medical procedure they want.
     
  15. Bäumer

    Bäumer Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,548
    Likes Received:
    225
    True, I maybe should have phrased that differently. IUDs can be very expensive and I am not quite sure that a typical Hobby Lobby employee would be able to afford one without insurance.
     
  16. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    54,522
    Likes Received:
    33,789
    With all due respect, what a crock. I was "forced" to pay Federal income taxes that paid for the invasion and occupation of Iraq by George W. Bush and his buddies, something that was and is a catastrophe for the United States of America, and something I was ardently against in the run up before Bush's mad adventure. I paid them anyway. As a customer of Hobby Lobby in the past, I can assure you that my significant other and I will not longer give them our business. We'll still be paying taxes, taxes that help pay the salaries of the radical Roberts Court that is busy dismantling long established law in a series of 5-4 votes.
     
  17. justtxyank

    justtxyank Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    41,905
    Likes Received:
    37,531
    Let's be clear here though. The insurance plans at Hobby Lobby do cover birth control. Only certain kind are not covered.

    This is true of all medication types in any insurance plan. They cover lots of high blood pressure meds, but not all, lots of blood thinners but not all, lots of asthma medicine but not all, some ADHD meds but not all, etc. You always have the choice to buy something else at your own expense.
     
  18. fallenphoenix

    fallenphoenix Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    9,821
    Likes Received:
    1,618
    Using religion as an excuse to skip out on having to pay for their employee's birth control, how sad. Getting an IUD is equal to a whole month's pay for their minimum wage employees.

    Is Christianity getting preferential treatment? Would the ruling have stood for a Muslim corporation?
     
  19. justtxyank

    justtxyank Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    41,905
    Likes Received:
    37,531
    An IUD is an optional birth control option that is not the first choice for most individuals or doctors.

    Not covering an IUD is not the same as not covering birth control. Hobby Lobby's insurance plans will still cover birth control.
     
  20. Bäumer

    Bäumer Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,548
    Likes Received:
    225
    Copper IUDs are used in many cases where the woman has complications from traditional hormonal birth control.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now