Use our new account feature to register for a free CLI account. Your new account will allow you to bookmark and organize articles and research for easy reference later - making it simple to keep track of the research that's important to you!
Register / Sign in
close-panel

Charlotte Lozier Institute

Phone: 202-223-8073
Fax: 571-312-0544

2776 S. Arlington Mill Dr.
#803
Arlington, VA 22206

Get Notifications

Sign up to receive email updates from Charlotte Lozier Institute.

Become A Defender of Life

Your donation helps us continue to provide world-class research in defense of life.

DONATE

Charlotte Lozier Institute

Phone: 202-223-8073
Fax: 571-312-0544

2776 S. Arlington Mill Dr.
#803
Arlington, VA 22206

Life & the LawAbortion

Supreme Court Will Review Abortion Drug Cases

Today the U.S. Supreme Court announced it will review two cases where the government is trying to force Christian-owned businesses to provide health care coverage that includes abortion-inducing drugs.

 

One case involves a legal challenge brought by Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. and Mardel, Inc.  Hobby Lobby is a chain of more than 500 arts-and-crafts stores with more than 13,000 employees.  Mardel is an affiliated chain of 35 Christian bookstores with about 400 employees.

 

Hobby Lobby and Mardel are owned and operated, through a management trust, by the Green Family:  David and Barbara and their children Steve, Mart, and Darsee.

 

The other case involves a legal challenge brought by Conestoga Wood Specialties, a cabinetmaker company in Pennsylvania.  Conestoga is owned by the Hahn Family: Norman, Elizabeth, Norman Lemar, Anthony, and Kevin.

 

Both the Green family and the Hahn family are Christian.  And both families object to providing company health insurance plans that include drugs and devices that can cause abortion.

 

Under Obamacare regulations health insurance plans must include “[a]ll Food and Drug Administration approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity,” as prescribed.  The law provides that these services must be offered on a preferential basis, that is, cost-free to the insured.

 

This rule is known as the Obamacare contraception mandate.  It has generated massive litigation.

 

According to the Greens, who own Hobby Lobby and Mardel, the Obamacare contraception mandate “includes drugs and devices—namely, Plan B, Ella, and two intrauterine devices—which, the government concedes, may prevent an embryo from implanting in the womb.”  The Greens argue that, “given their beliefs,” they cannot provide insurance that includes these drugs and devices “without facilitating what they believe to be an abortion.”

 

The Hahns object to the mandate on similar if not identical grounds.

 

These cases will undoubtedly reinvigorate cries of a so-called “war on women.”  The argument and rhetoric are faulty.  Pro-life advocates should be prepared to respond.

 

The companies and their Christian owners in these cases are not asking for the government to restrict the freedom of private citizens to access contraceptives and abortion.  Nor is the issue in these cases whether the government should or should not provide or pay for those products and services itself.

 

Indeed:

  • Private individuals have the freedom to obtain contraceptives.
  • Private companies have the freedom to provide contraceptives and other services to employees however they see fit.
  • Furthermore, governments routinely pay for private individuals to access contraceptives.

 

The question is whether the government should force Christian families that own businesses to violate their conscience by including what extensive evidence shows are abortion-causing drugs and devices in their company health insurance plans.

 

By deciding to review their cases, the Supreme Court now has the opportunity to protect the religious freedom of Hobby Lobby, Mardle, and Conestoga Wood Specialties and the Christian families that own them.

 

The issue of conscience protection involved is ultimately universal and transcends the particulars of these cases.  If the government can require private parties to provide abortion-inducing drugs, it may likewise compel them to provide elective abortion, prescriptions for assisted suicide, and other procedures (or even limitations on coverage, say, on the number of children a couple may cover) that offend their deepest convictions.  For this reason, Americans of all political and moral persuasions have a stake in the outcome of these lawsuits.

 

Tom Messner is a Legal Policy Fellow and Charles A. Donovan is the President of the Charlotte Lozier Institute in Washington, D.C.

 

Latest Posts

February 1, 2023 Abortion Reporting: Hawaii (2020) January 30, 2023 Abortion Reporting: Pennsylvania (2021) January 27, 2023 Abortion Reporting: Maine (2021)

You Might Also Be Interested In

NEBRASKA FACT CHECK: Heart Rate at Six Weeks is 110 Beats Per Minute

charlotte-lozier-institute Charlotte Lozier Institute
January 11, 2023

VIRGINIA FACT CHECK: Science Demonstrates Unborn Babies Feel Pain by 15 Weeks

charlotte-lozier-institute Charlotte Lozier Institute
January 11, 2023
The Effort to Reinterpret EMTALA to Mandate Abortions

The Effort to Reinterpret EMTALA to Mandate Abortions

November 8, 2022

Become A Defender of Life

Your donation helps us continue to provide world-
class research in defense of life.

BECOME A PARTNER
cta-image