The Most Recent Top Court Decision on Contraception Coverage

 

SCOTUS upholds law that allows employers to refuse birth control coverage on religious grounds

Video taken from the channel: WXYZ-TV Detroit | Channel 7


 

Supreme Court Strips Women Of Birth Control

Video taken from the channel: Rebel HQ


 

US Supreme Court Lets Private Companies Deny Birth Control Coverage

Video taken from the channel: VOA News


 

Supreme Court to hear birth control case

Video taken from the channel: CNN


 

Supreme Court allows change to birth control coverage

Video taken from the channel: WKYC Channel 3


 

Supreme Court rules on contraception coverage and religious freedom cases

Video taken from the channel: CBS News


 

Supreme Court ruling may cause tens of thousands to lose birth control coverage

Video taken from the channel: Washington Post


WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a Trump administration regulation that lets employers with religious or moral objections limit women’s access to birth control coverage under the. The opinion upheld a Trump administration rule that significantly cut back on the Affordable Care Act requirement that insurers provide free birth control coverage under almost all health care. The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld rules issued by the Trump administration that allow employers with religious or moral objections to deny women access to free birth control coverage. The court’s 7-2 vote struck a blow against the birth control mandate, a hotly litigated regulation under the Affordable Care Act that requires most private health insurance plans to cover contraceptives without.

“The Supreme Court’s decision to allow the Trump administration to put control over people’s birth control in the hands of the whims of their bosses and employers is. Supreme Court justices on Wednesday expressed skepticism that the Trump administration can broadly allow employers to deny workers free birth control coverage, in a case that could inflame the. MONDAY, June 30, 2014 (HealthDay News) Family-owned companies don’t have to comply with a provision of the Affordable Care Act that requires them to offer insurance coverage for contraception if that requirement violates their religious principles, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday.

On July 8, the justices reached a decision in Trump v. Pennsylvania, and the Supreme Court’s ruling on birth control lets more employers deny coverage by upholding the Trump administration’s 2017. WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday cleared the way for the Trump administration to give the nation’s employers more leeway in refusing to provide free birth control for their workers.

Washington — The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the Trump administration’s broad exemptions to employers who raise religious or moral objections to providing free birth control coverage. Supreme Court allows Trump to exempt employers from Obamacare birth control mandate The court ruled 7-2 in a case involving the Little Sisters of the Poor.

List of related literature:

But in 2014, the Supreme Court struck down the section of the Affordable Care Act that required employers to cover certain contraceptives for their female employees, granting a religious exemption to certain types of corporations.

“The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap” by Stephanie Coontz
from The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap
by Stephanie Coontz
Basic Books, 2016

But examining one more, the Yasmin/Yaz proceeding, may shed some additional light on how strong judicial settlement signals and subsequent rulings may affect plaintiffs’ choices.

“Mass Tort Deals: Backroom Bargaining in Multidistrict Litigation” by Elizabeth Chamblee Burch
from Mass Tort Deals: Backroom Bargaining in Multidistrict Litigation
by Elizabeth Chamblee Burch
Cambridge University Press, 2019

In a 5–4 decision, the court majority determined that the ACA’s contraception mandate imposed a significant enough burden on the plaintiff companies’ exercise of their beliefs so as to violate RFRA.

“Essentials of Health Policy and Law” by Joel B. Teitelbaum, Sara E. Wilensky
from Essentials of Health Policy and Law
by Joel B. Teitelbaum, Sara E. Wilensky
Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2016

But Shanahan also cited the Court’s more recent ruling on abortion, Roe v. Wade, which ordained a constitutional “right to privacy.”

“Whose America?: Culture Wars in the Public Schools” by Jonathan Zimmerman
from Whose America?: Culture Wars in the Public Schools
by Jonathan Zimmerman
Harvard University Press, 2009

Contraceptive coverage under the Affordable Care Act, and possible exemption via RFRA, is again at issue before the Supreme Court.

“Religion and the American Constitutional Experiment” by John Witte, Joel A. Nichols
from Religion and the American Constitutional Experiment
by John Witte, Joel A. Nichols
Oxford University Press, 2016

Unfortunately for Comstock, when the bill came out of committee on February 14, Senator George Edmunds of Vermont took objection and had it amended to include a clause to permit birth control or abortion with “the prescription of a physician in good standing.”

“Devices and Desires: A History of Contraceptives in America” by Andrea Tone
from Devices and Desires: A History of Contraceptives in America
by Andrea Tone
Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2002

As the National Women’s Law Center notes about the majority decision, there was no discussion of the “important role that birth control plays in women’s lives” (NWLC 2014).

“Women and Politics: Paths to Power and Political Influence” by Julie Dolan, Professor, Melissa M. Deckman, Professor, Michele L. Swers, Professor
from Women and Politics: Paths to Power and Political Influence
by Julie Dolan, Professor, Melissa M. Deckman, Professor, Michele L. Swers, Professor
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2019

A few years later, in Maher v. Roe, 432 U.S. 464 (1977), also presented in Chapter 8, the Supreme Court rejected an argument that the government violated equal protection when it refused to fund abortions, even though it was paying for childbirth and other medical care costs.

“Constitutional Law” by Erwin Chemerinsky
from Constitutional Law
by Erwin Chemerinsky
Wolters Kluwer, 2019

In Maher v. Roe (1977), the Court voted 6-to-3 to uphold a Connecticut welfare regulation that denied Medicaid benefits to indigent women seeking to have abortions, unless their attending physicians certified their abortions as “medically necessary.”

“American Constitutional Law, Volume II: Civil Rights and Liberties” by Otis Stephens, Jr., John Scheb, II
from American Constitutional Law, Volume II: Civil Rights and Liberties
by Otis Stephens, Jr., John Scheb, II
Cengage Learning, 2007

After a decision in the U.S. court of appeals that granted an injunction ordering the federal government to stop enforcement of the contraception rule, the Department of Health and Human Services appealed and was accepted to the Supreme Court.

“The SAGE Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society” by Robert W. Kolb
from The SAGE Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society
by Robert W. Kolb
SAGE Publications, 2018

Oktay Kutluk

Kutluk Oktay, MD, FACOG is one of the world's foremost experts in fertility preservation as well as ovarian stimulation and in vitro fertilization for infertility treatments. He developed and performed the world's first ovarian transplantation procedures as well as pioneered new ovarian stimulation protocols for embryo and oocyte freezing for breast and endometrial cancer patients.

Mail: [email protected]
Telephone: +1 (877) 492-3666

Biography: https://medicine.yale.edu/profile/kutluk_oktay/
Bibliography: oktay_bibliography

View all posts

29 comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • Americans should not have to pay taxes for perverts who are Sexually out of control and do not want to be responsible for children.

  • After reading through the comments I have come to the realization that a large number of people do not know how birth control or the morning after pill work.. They keep referring to both as “abortion” pills when neither of these medications have anything to do with abortion… If you are gonna protest something you should probably at least know what it is.

  • Contraceptives do not in any way prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. When a woman takes the birth control pill her ovaries do not release an egg and so fertilization can not take place. This should not be an issue with any religion. One year ago I left the Catholic Church because of their rhetoric against birth control pills. They are evil and kill babies. No they don’t, there is no baby to kill. Sandra Fluke did not want free condoms. She wanted her insurance to pay for birth control pills. How often she had sex is not relevant and no ones business. Men are not treated with this much disdain and ridicule. They are the ones who should be responsible for the cost of condoms. Oh, if only……….

  • Correct me if I’m wrong, so birth control isn’t free anymore? Because I know there’s lots of women especially teens that uses birth control.

  • This is a fine example of a confusion the likes of Jonathan Haidt peddle that the “left” and “right” are just different values/moral approaches to evolutionary fitness.

    It’s not that it’s different standards of evidence. Conservatism is an understandable form of cowardice, given their absence of any standard of evidence. When pushed by even the lightest of criticism, they will run to tradition and faith. That’s not a value. It’s a non-epistemology. Limbic fitness noise.

    But I can sympathize. Being alive as a frail, suffering, dying piece of painmeat is hell.

  • after we topple this top-heavy oligarchy, then we will rebuild a new, egalitarian society WITH universal national health insurance for all and WITHOUT the oppressive hegemony of our 444 bloated billionaire oligarchs.

  • I am all for ending abortion, but if you make birth control more expensive to the individual, what do you think is going to happen to rate of unwanted pregnancies?

  • This is not just about abortion! Its a loophole for corporations. It also includes all forms of birth control, even for married women. More money for big business #1. Men in control of women #2 lastly morals. Whats next? Women and people of color can no longer vote!

  • I’m confused why anyone would be upset, why should anyone else have to pay for you to not get pregnant cuz you want sex but no kids.. you can talk about the alternative reasons ppl use birth control but do not act ignorant. The main reason by far is avoiding kids but still having sex. Which I do not see why anyone else should pay for, common sense ��

  • honestly birth control seems like too many chemicals in the body and unnatural…..
    better just to get a non latex box of vegan condoms. 30 bucks or so.
    maybe one day living wages will be a thing so that 30 bucks does not really equal 300 bucks =(

  • For me the choice is easy ;
    I already have the children I want..
    SO I REALLY DO NOT NEED
    TO HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE:
    HUBBY CAN GET IT FROM WHOM SO EVER HE CHOOSE
    THAT IS WHAT CONSERVATIVE MEN DO
    ANYHOW..
    AND WHAT THEY CALL IT?
    A MULLIGAN:
    THE gods of America say,we give you a mulligan,
    Hey man keep on giving them,we don’t care if ya do:

  • Gee… you mean freedom of religion still exists in this country, per the constitution? I wonder what’s gonna happen when aunt Ruth finally retires?? You DO know that Trump is getting re-elected, right? Sorry for bursting your safe-space bubble.

  • The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion something the Leftists cannot tolerate. Also that the government cannot establish an official state religion.
    Freedom of religion means just that: the government cannot impose the will of Leftists to force their deranged ideology on those religions.

  • Abortion is not “birth control” you scumbags! Taxpayers funded abortion is truly disgusting. Cutting a babies head off a few months before birth shouldn’t be controversial in 2020. Truly disgusting.

  • Denying employees of healthcare of any kind, based on the employers religious belief, is in itself discrimination based on an employees differing religious belief.
    What’s next, denying lgbtq+ of healthcare altogether, because it’s against the employers religion?
    WTF!?

  • Religions are allowed to discriminate against people who work for them. They asked the court to allow them to discriminate against people because they are a religion. So now we know not to support religions.

  • Fake news? This is the Communist Washington Post. What did I miss it sounds like they told the truth. A paradigm shift in front of my eyes

  • What a fucking joke. Our supreme court has become a useless entity that stands for nothing. This is only the beginning. Now any corporation can concoct any “religious belief” it wants in order to deny rights and benefits to it’s employees. Breaks? I don’t think so…that’s against my religion. Overtime? Paid vacation? IRAs? Paid sick time? No way, man…god doesn’t like those things, don’t you know? Fuck our useless federal government and fuck all these greedy scumbag corporations. Labor rights in this country are going down the toilet faster than a ten pound turd.

  • Brilliant photo taken at the oval office where Trump pretends to be praying (for the sake of it, think about that) just like i pretended to sleep when my mommy was sneaking up to check on us. When I was 7.

  • Hey anybody get that overpopulation is the biggest threat to our planet jobs opportunities just keep breeding popping kids out like there’s no environmental impact. Great plan instead of offering free birth control to all women in the world lessening so much of this world’s suffering. As a religious issue it doesn’t sound very Christian compassionate or caring. Is the Deli Lama the only spiritual leader in the world that gets this simple common sense compassionate response.

  • Sex is a choice. Sex is a choice YOU make. You pay for the consequences of that choice, not your employer, not the government. If you cannot afford to have sex, make the choice not to have sex. Don’t make someone else pay for it.

  • My employer does not subsidize my health insurance, they pay my premium in trade as a wage. There is no such thing as benefits, no one gives me any thing for free. Secondly the corp/collective does not have rights over the individual. This country was founded on the belief of the sovereignty of the individual.

  • The Supreme Court is a DISGRACE. It does not rule by law but by their biases. So, the question remains. Why go to school at all to be able to sit on the Supreme Court bench, when all you need is your BIASES TO MAKE DECISIONS?

  • The Supreme Court is more conservative than the American electorate, which means the Court will, in all likelihood, continue making decisions that are against the interest of the people. This is a very bad thing potentially, because it gives the Court the go-ahead to undo environmental regulations, get rid of the right to choose, eliminate rights for undocumented immigrants and minorities, and allow corporations to have more control of the people.

    We have to ask ourselves this question: does it make sense to have a court of 9 unelected judges make decisions for the entire country?

    I think the answer to that question is no. I’d rather let the American electorate make decisions for the country. With direct democracy, this would be possible. The voters could decide to have universal healthcare, which would include universal birth control. In a direct democracy, the voters have the final say. If the voters, for example, wanted to overturn the Citizens United decision and ban money in politics and make elections publicly-funded, then they’d be able to do so.

    The Supreme Court will probably never act in the interest of the people, but the people themselves can act in their interest.

    Direct democracy is likely the only way to save this nation from disastrous corporate-oligarchy, but I don’t think we’ll be able to get direct democracy without a violent revolution.

  • woman loose again. over religious heretics mapping out what women do with sentient decision making. Religion has no place in mandating birth restrictions.

  • This decision makes just as much sense as banning vasectomies for men. Nobody seems to be opposed to that, but birth control for women? Nope!

  • Doesn’t the constitution say that church and state are separate? In other words, your religion is not to be inflicted on others. Therefore, this in unconstitutional.

  • This is why we should not have freedom of religion. If you agree with freedom of religion, but don’t agree with it in cases like this, then you are being stupid. Stop supporting brainwashed groups of people, you are fueling the stupidity.

  • ✝️ The Supreme Court issued 2critical rulings this morning.
    Both are big WINS.
    First, the Court ruled that the Trump administration was within its rights to grant a religious exemption to the Little Sisters of the Poor. The Court again upheld the right of the religious order of nuns to procure health coverage that does not support abortion-inducing drugs.
    In a separate case, the Court reaffirmed that a Catholic school not the government can decide whether to hire, retain, or terminate certain employees. This case matters because anti-discrimination laws have recently been expanded to force employers to retain gay, lesbian, and transgender employees (or even a man who simply identifies as a woman), even if the employer objects to their lifestyle. Catholic schools now have the freedom to decide what is best for their schools. Thank you Supreme Court ����