General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDid anyone just see Rachel's segment on the Hobby Lobby ruling?
She says that the SC quietly issued some followup documents that said that all forms of birth control (not just the 4 originally mentioned) were included in the ruling. This is hard to believe...
rurallib
(62,423 posts)discussed it this morning filling in for Steph
Kos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/01/1310918/-Supreme-Court-clarifies-Yes-Hobby-Lobby-is-about-all-slut-pills
Ilsa
(61,695 posts)There were several threads about it. On Tuesday, the SC issued a clarification that closely held corps could deny ALL contraception coverage, not just the four HL had singled out. SC also told lower courts to revisit any rulings to the contrary.
Also, other companies that wish to apply for federal contracts have asked the Obama Administration to relieve them of requirement not t discriminate against LGBT persons.
Believe it. Complacency and stolen elections make this shit happen.
I'd been away from DU for a few days.
Hekate
(90,714 posts)Skittles
(153,169 posts)yup
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)There's a ton of DU threads on the this already
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Triana
(22,666 posts)The Hobby Lobby decision is much more sweeping than conservative media are portraying. Here's how: http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/07/01/fox-news-ignores-current-legal-challenges-that/199960
. . .
The idea that the ruling in Hobby Lobby is somehow contained to the facts presented -- and the four contraceptives Hobby Lobby originally challenged -- is misleading. As the Associated Press reported the day after the decision, a flurry of subsequent Supreme Court orders "confirmed that its decision a day earlier extending religious rights to closely held corporations applies broadly to the contraceptive coverage requirement in the new health care law, not just the handful of methods the justices considered in their ruling." These orders, sending cases involving companies challenging all 20 contraceptive methods -- not just the Hobby Lobby ones -- back down for reconsideration, "sent a fairly strong signal on Tuesday that its ruling giving some for-profit businesses a right not to provide birth control services to their female workers goes beyond the specific methods at issue in that decision," in the words of legal expert Lyle Denniston.
Further, although the conservative majority claimed its holding applied only to "closely held" corporations, it failed to note that over 90 percent of corporations are defined as closely held, and not all closely held corporation are mom-and-pop shops -- including Hobby Lobby, which employs thousands of people and operates over 600 stores. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pointed out in her dissent, "as Hobby Lobby's case demonstrates, such claims are indeed pursued by large corporations, employing thousands of persons of different faiths, whose ownership is not diffuse. 'Closely held' is not synonymous with 'small.'" Ginsburg went on to note that "Hobby Lobby is hardly the only enterprise of sizable scale that is family owned or closely held. For example, the family-owned candy giant Mars, Inc., takes in $33 billion in revenues and has some 72,000 employees, and closely held Cargill, Inc., takes in more than $136 billion in revenues and employs some 140,000 persons." Other corporate law experts seconded Ginsburg's warning that the majority's newfound corporate religion could be used by all companies, closely held or no.
Cha
(297,314 posts)progressoid
(49,991 posts)It's goes from bad to worse.