Tag Archives: Topic: Insurance

IndyStar: Iowa’s human services director has denied a petition from House Republicans demanding that the state Medicaid program stop paying for abortions of pregnancies involving severe fetal abnormalities or caused by rape or incest. Chuck Palmer wrote in a letter Friday that banning state payment for such abortions would violate federal requirements.

Paul Rondeau of American Life League at the Washington Examiner: President Obama, with the proud help of his friends at Planned Parenthood, wrote Obamacare. Together, they make you an offer you can’t refuse — paying almost $965 million, according to estimates by the Alliance Defending Freedom, for “preventive services” like abortion.

ACLU: While today’s controversy centers around access to contraception and eradicating gender discrimination, the claim that the business makes in today’s case – that religious objections should trump laws designed to promote equality – is not unique. A few examples . . .

Colorado Statesman: Mike Norton, one of the attorneys representing the Newland family who is also counsel for the Christian conservative organization Alliance Defense Fund, told The Colorado Statesman that the Hercules case could set the tone for many pending and looming lawsuits. “It’s definitely a precedent-setting case,” said the former congressional candidate and U.S. Attorney for Colorado. “It really is the only case of its kind to this date which has an adverse ruling against Obamacare and this HHS mandate.” [more] . . . A new lobbying organization in Colorado, Secular Coalition for Colorado, says it will fight to ensure that politics never interfere with access to health care or other public policy issues . . .

Turtle Bay and Beyond: Can a “human-centered approach” to issues include policies with the express purpose of eliminating people? This argument is cropping up, particularly in debates over climate change and now health care.

Sacramento Bee: Alaska’s health commissioner says his department didn’t intend to restrict the definition of a medically necessary abortion in proposed regulations for abortion payment conditions.

Hugh Hewitt provides this brief update on the Newland ruling. | MP3 Audio 1 min

NRB: As noted last week, Hercules Industries in Colorado went to federal court in search of an injunction to stave off the Obama Administration mandate . . . As of August 1, that new mandate is now in effect . . . The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) celebrated the day as a victory for women, but noted, “The Obama administration will continue to work with all employers to give them the flexibility and resources they need to implement the health care law in a way that protects women’s health while making common-sense accommodations for values like religious liberty.” In a blog post, Amy Payne and Sarah Torre of the Heritage Foundation responded to the HHS statement, “Religious liberty is a fundamental right guaranteed under the First Amendment of the Constitution, not a mere ‘value’ whose worth is subject to devaluation by any given Administration’s policy.” | Original NRB report: Hercules Battles HHS

Matt Bowman appeared on the Victoria Taft Show to discuss the Newland case. | MP3 audio 8:34 mins

Charles Fried at SCOTUS Blog: Finally, even though the Chief Justice’s lead opinion rejected the Commerce Clause basis for the mandate in the same terms as his four Republican colleagues, those four did not join, or even so much as mention their Chief’s opinion on this issue, but instead published a highly unusual (though not entirely unprecedented) joint opinion which – whatever its motivation – had the appearance of a deliberate repudiation, not of the opinion but of its author. It is these four surprises that are the subject of this essay. In setting the stage for these surprises, I am afraid I must go over some ground that constitutional scholars would by now have plowed into a veritable dust bowl of commentary, but the lesson I draw may be a different one from the many that are being drawn from the unexpected dénouement of this most important case.

CBS 4 Denver reports on the Newland case. The Video is here.

Jonathan Adler at the Volokh Conspiracy: Today the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is holding a hearing on the Internal Revenue Service’s role in “Enforcing ObamaCare’s New Rules and Taxes.” Among the subjects of the hearing is a recent IRS rule authorizing tax credits and subsidies for the purchase of qualifying health insurance plans in federally-run exchanges. Although the plain text of the PPACA only authorizes tax credits in state-run exchanges, the IRS promulgated this rule to ensure the credits (and associated subsidies) are available nationwide. This rule will affect quite a few states because somewhere between 15 and 30 states (if not more) will fail to create exchanges by 2014. The rule is also illegal.

William Duncan at National Review Online: In trying to distinguish a U.S. Supreme Court decision summarily dismissing a constitutional claim for same-sex marriage from the early 1970s, yesterday’s decision said: “Baker presented a state constitutional question while this case presents a United States constitutional question” (page 23). Here are the issues (see page 14) presented to the Supreme Court in Baker:

National Review Online: Carrie Kolesar of Seneca Hardwood Lumber Co. in Cranberry, Pa., tells National Review Online’s Kathryn Jean Lopez in an interview. “No American should be faced with a decision like that,” she continues. Kolesar is a part owner of this family business established in 1961 . . . A few weeks after the mandate was finalized, I saw that Alliance Defending Freedom was taking a case for a private business and I contacted them for advice regarding our situation. The HHS mandate has put us in a situation where we can’t provide insurance for ourselves and our employees without violating our moral obligations and freedom of conscience. My parents, my siblings, and I believe that the public and our government need to be more aware of the problems caused when we don’t protect freedom of conscience.

Archdiocese of New York: Another option is to continue to offer health insurance, but, honoring our conscience, not include these objectionable services. There would be a $100 fine per day for each person who qualified for the coverage. Let’s assume that an agency has 50 people for which it would be subject to this penalty. At $100 per day, per person, over the course of the year it would pay a penalty of $1,825,000. ($100 x 50 people x 365 days). That’s a steep penalty from the government in order to try and convince religious agencies to turn their back on their conscience. That’s money that will then not go to serve those in need. Many of our services could not survive this heavy penalty.

Andy Newland and Matt Bowman appeared on Dateline Washington, Radio America with Greg Corombos to discuss the Newland ruling. | MP3 audio 7:05 mins

Hugh Hewitt at the National Catholic Register: With the help of the superb lawyers from the Alliance Defending Freedom (formerly the Alliance Defense Fund), the Newlands sought relief from President Barack Obama’s mandate, citing both the protections of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the 1993 U.S. Constitution . . . The Newlands have shown the way and are to be thanked for their courage. Lawyers from the Alliance Defending Freedom or other groups like the Becket Fund (which is representing the Register’s parent company, EWTN) will evaluate any case that any private employer may want to press to free themselves from Obamacare’s imposition on their genuine religious beliefs.

Ken Blackwell and Ken Klukowski at The Hill: Here’s the blueprint for how the states can eviscerate three central pillars of ObamaCare, crippling it and set the stage for replacing it if Mitt Romney takes the White House and the GOP takes the Senate this November.

SCOTUS Blog: Lawyers for a religious college in Illinois asked a federal judge in Washington on Wednesday to spare it from having to provide insurance for birth control and abortion for its employees.   Wheaton College, an Evangelical Christian college that takes its name from its home city, has filed a constitutional challenge to government health care rules mandating that employers include coverage of those services in health benefit plans.

Matt Bowman and Andy Newland on the radio with Tom Lucero on AM Colorado, 1310 KFKA to discuss the case. | MP3 audio 11:43 mins

Catholic Culture: In arguing against a firm’s attempt to block application of the HHS mandate, lawyers for the Department of Justice stated that “for-profit, secular employers generally do not engage in any exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment.” . . . “A secular entity by definition does not practice religion,” the Obama administration had argued in its filing. “The Newlands nonetheless claim that the regulations substantially burden their religious exercise because the regulations may require the group health plan sponsored by their secular company to provide health insurance that includes contraceptive coverage.”

Cardinal Newman Society: But this time, Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont., chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health & Human Service and Education introduced conscience protections in his subcommittee’s 2013 appropriations bill that funds the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

LifeNews: The pro-life Catholic group Priests for Life is the first to announce it will openly defy the new pro-abortion mandate the HHS department put in force today under the Obamacare health care law.

Denver Post: “The principle decided here is applicable to all of the cases raising the issue of can the government justify forcing people to choose between their faith, and engaging in business or serving the community,” said Matt Bowman, legal counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a coalition of Christian lawyers.

LifeNews: The Obamacare HHS mandate takes effect today that requires Americans to violate their religious beliefs to implement the president’s health care law. The mandate compels religious employers to pay for and refer women for abortion-causing drugs, birth control, contraception and sterilizations.

Jane Norton at the Denver Post: Fortunately, a court just issued the first-ever order against Obama’s mandate, preventing it from being applied to the Newland family while their lawsuit, filed by their attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom, goes forward. And we’d all better hope the Newlands prevail in the end. (Jane Norton was lieutenant governor of Colorado from 2003 to 2007. Her husband, Michael Norton, is a member of the legal team representing Hercules Industries.) [Jane was also a regional director of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services from 1988-1993 for six states, including Colorado.]

CNSNews: Gary Marx, executive director of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, praised a federal judge in Colorado for issuing a temporary injunction on Friday, stopping the Obama administration from enforcing the regulation against Hercules Industries, a heating, ventilation and air-conditioning business owned by a Catholic family. “Confidence in the system and hope for religious liberty was mildly restored when a federal district judge issued a temporary injunction blocking Barack Obama’s health care mandate from compelling a business to provide insurance coverage of sterilization, contraception, and abortion-inducing drugs,” Marx said. [see also powerful Brent Bozell III quote]

Investor’s Business Daily: Since Hercules Industries would be required to begin offering the new coverage when its self-insured plan renews on Nov. 1, Alliance Defending Freedom, the group representing Hercules, has requested a preliminary injunction that could prevent the government from enforcing the mandate against the company by Aug. 1, the date when the company would need to begin the process of making changes to its plan.

Ruth Institute Blog: The law firm, Alliance Defending Freedom, represent the Newland family, who were the victors in today’s court ruling. Twenty lawsuits against the HHS mandate remain, and we will continue to keep you up-to-date on their progress!

The ruling in Pedersen v. Office of Personnel Management, No. 3:10-cv-1750 (VLB) (D. Conn. July 31, 2012)

Paul Newland and Matt Bowman appear in the Fox News video interview here.

LifeNews: Despite one positive ruling in a case allowing a company to be exempted from the Obamacare HHS mandate, the pro-abortion mandate that pro-life groups strenuously oppose will take effect tomorrow.

CBN (includes video): The Denver company is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom (formerly the Alliance Defense Fund)

Alan Sears appeared on the Hugh Hewitt Show to discuss the Newland case. | MP3 audio 8:42 mins

Matt Bowman appeared on the radio to discuss the Newland ruling. | Drew Mariani Show, MP3 audio 16:40 mins | Al Kresta in the Afternoon Show, MP3 audio 11:49 mins | News and Views with Chuck Bates, MP3 audio 13:08 mins

LifeNews: When Democrats in Congress pushed the Obamacare bill through, pro-life groups warned about rationing that could take place as a result. Although liberal groups and the mainstream media laughed at the projections, they are now coming to pass.

NC Register: “We’re very pleased the judge recognized that religious freedom applies to families and their activities in business and that a mandate that violates religious freedom cannot be imposed against faithful Christian believers,” said Matt Bowman, legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, a coalition of Christian attorneys. Alliance Defending Freedom was formerly called the Alliance Defense Fund.

Catholic Online (includes video): As the August 1, 2012 date for the initial implementation requirements of the HHS mandate drew near, the Alliance Defending Freedom (formerly Alliance Defense Fund) issued an opinion advising Catholic Colleges and other Church related institutions of the a “temporary one year safe harbor” which could delay the consequences of their non-compliance for one year . . . However, the Alliance Defending Freedom was doing more than just helping Colleges and other organizations delay the punitive effects of this mandate. They were busy on another front, showing themselves to be outstanding religious liberty lawyers.

NRLC News: Every American, including family business owners, should be free to live and do business according to their faith. For the time being, Hercules Industries will be able to do just that,” said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. “The cost of freedom for this family could be millions of dollars per year in fines that will cripple their business if the Obama administration ultimately has its way. This lawsuit seeks to ensure that Washington bureaucrats cannot force families to abandon their faith just to earn a living. Americans don’t want politicians and bureaucrats deciding what faith is, who the faithful are, and where and how that faith may be lived out.”

FRC Washington Update: Because of the ruling, at least one family-owned business, Hercules Industries, won’t feel the sting of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) war on religious liberty when the order takes effect this Wednesday. Thanks to our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the Newland family has three months to take its lawsuit to the next level before the administration’s mandate, requiring it to offer abortion pills, contraception, and sterilization to the company’s 265 employees, takes effect.

Juneau Empire: Sen. Hollis French, in a letter to health department Commissioner Bill Streur, said the agency is seeking to reinstate criteria overturned by the Alaska Supreme Court in 2001. The court held the state must fund medically necessary abortions if it funds medically necessary services for others with financial needs. The proposed regulation further defines “medically necessary.”

Reuters: Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on Sunday renewed his criticism of Chief Justice John Roberts’ reasoning in upholding President Barack Obama’s 2010 healthcare law and also said the Constitution undoubtedly permits some gun control.

Washington Post: The Supreme Court may have declared that the government can order Americans to get health insurance, but that doesn’t mean they’re going to sign up.

Ross Douthat at NY Times: If you want to fine Catholic hospitals for following Catholic teaching, or prevent Jewish parents from circumcising their sons, or ban Chick-fil-A in Boston, then don’t tell religious people that you respect our freedoms. Say what you really think: that the exercise of our religion threatens all that’s good and decent, and that you’re going to use the levers of power to bend us to your will. There, didn’t that feel better? Now we can get on with the fight.

Matt Bowman on the Ladona Harvey Show on KOGO FM 95.7 to discuss the Newland case.  | MP3 audio 8:42 mins

Steven Aden at LifeNews: The Left, by its very nature, is ideologically driven. Ideology has a tendency to crowd out reason for the sake of vision.
Witness the fact that certain members of the Left now want Americans to believe the Obama abortion pill mandate—which violates religious freedom—is, in fact, an exercise of religious freedom.

NCPA Policy Digest: Eight state governors have said that they will take advantage of the recent Supreme Court ruling allowing them to opt out of the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) dramatic expansion of Medicaid. Their actions have been dismissed by liberal columnists as mere partisan posturing, but further analysis reveals that opting out may be the fiscally responsible choice for a number of states, says Avik Roy, a senior fellow with the Manhattan Institute.

Newsmax: In its brief responding to the Justice Department on behalf of the Newland family, the Alliance Defending Freedom said, according to CNSNews.com, “The government argues that the Newlands forfeited their right to religious liberty as soon as they endeavored to earn their living by running a corporation.” “Nothing in the Constitution, the Supreme Court’s decisions, or federal law requires — or even suggests — that families forfeit their religious liberty protection when they try to earn a living, such as by operating a corporate business,” they argued.

Reuters: “Every American, including family business owners, should be free to live and do business according to their faith,” Matthew Bowman, a lawyer for Hercules with the Alliance Defense Fund, said in a statement.

Think Progress: It’s bizarre enough that five Supreme Court justices cannot tell the difference between a corporation and a person. For the plaintiffs to win this case, a judge will have to hold that a corporation can be Catholic.

Michael Foust at Baptist Press: The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) is representing the company. “This lawsuit seeks to ensure that Washington bureaucrats cannot force families to abandon their faith just to earn a living,” ADF attorney Matt Bowman said in a statement. “Americans don’t want politicians and bureaucrats deciding what faith is, who the faithful are, and where and how that faith may be lived out.”

Wall Street Journal (via Google): What’s significant about Friday’s decision is that it opens an avenue for nonreligious employers to challenge the requirement . . . The decision by Judge Kane only applies to the heating-and-cooling company. But other small businesses could apply for similar relief, said Matt Bowman, a lawyer for Alliance Defending Freedom, which represented the Newlands in the case. Mr. Bowman also said that the decision would boost other challenges to the contraception provisions. Religious universities and charities, including the University of Notre Dame, have also sued the administration over the requirements. The Obama administration has said it will work with Catholic-affiliated institutions to try to reach a compromise, prompting two judges to toss out those cases. “Right now, the first judge to rule on the merits of religious freedom ruled that religious freedom is more important than government mandates,” said Mr. Bowman.

Ken Kuklowski at Breitbart: On August 1, Obamacare’s latest outrage goes into effect as the “HHS Mandate” takes effect, and the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) just scored the first victory in religious liberty against this authoritarian decree days before its implementation . . . This victory is by no means final, but it’s the first of its kind. As ADF’s lawyer on this case, Matt Bowman, said today, “Every American, including family business owners, should be free to live and do business according to their faith. Hercules Industries will be able to do just that.” He’s right, and now we’ll see if the courts continue to agree.

LifeNews: Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys obtained the first-ever order against the mandate on behalf of Hercules Industries and the Catholic family that owns it. The administration opposed the order, arguing, contrary to the U.S. Constitution, that people of faith forfeit their religious liberty once they engage in business . . . Still, leading pro-life advocates like Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life applauded the ruling. “This decision marks the beginning of the end of the unjust and unconstitutional HHS mandate. Even though the Aug. 1 deadline for compliance is still in effect for organizations like Priests for Life, it’s good news that the suit filed by the owners of Hercules Industries has been successful in holding off, at least temporarily, this mandate that is so clearly a violation of the religious freedom guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and the laws of our country. This gives us reason to be optimistic as our own lawsuit progresses,” he told LifeNews.

Ed Whelan at National Review Bench Memos: That said, the lawyers at the Alliance Defending Freedom (the new name for the Alliance Defense Fund) deserve high praise for their fine work presenting this case on behalf of plaintiffs.

GOPUSA: “This is the very first ruling on whether Obamacare can violate religious freedom and the judge said no,” said Matt Bowman, a lawyer for legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom, formerly known as the Alliance Defense Fund.

The Examiner: “Every American, including family business owners, should be free to live and do business according to their faith. For the time being, Hercules Industries will be able to do just that,” said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Bowman after the decision. Bowman added, “The cost of freedom for this family could be millions of dollars per year in fines that will cripple their business if the Obama administration ultimately has its way. This lawsuit seeks to ensure that Washington bureaucrats cannot force families to abandon their faith just to earn a living. Americans don’t want politicians and bureaucrats deciding what faith is, who the faithful are, and where and how that faith may be lived out.” The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, also a pro-life legal group involved in the case, says the decision could spell the eventual overturning of the mandate itself.

Jennifer Marshall and Dominique Ludvigson at Heritage Foundation: The Foundry: Colorado federal District Court Judge and Carter appointee John L. Kane granted a preliminary injunction Friday on behalf of Hercules Industries in Newland v. Sebelius. The injunction secured by Newland’s attorneys at the Alliance Defending Freedom is the first to be ordered by a federal court judge in litigation surrounding the Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate under Obamacare.

One News Now: Matt Bowman is an attorney with ADF. He says this is the very first ruling on whether Obamacare can violate religious freedom.

Eurasia Review: Michael Norton, senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the lawsuit is “very important” because it determines “whether family-owned small businesses have the freedom to practice their faith as they wish in the public square and in the public arena, or whether they will be obliged to offer health insurance coverage that violates that faith.” “Our view is that every American should be free to live and do business according to their faith. They should not have to choose between their faith and doing what some bureaucrat or politician thinks ought to be the way they live out their faith,” Norton said in a July 26 interview.

Human Events: Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys obtained the first-ever order against the mandate on behalf of Hercules Industries and the Catholic family that owns it. The administration opposed the order, arguing, contrary to the U.S. Constitution, that people of faith forfeit their religious liberty once they engage in business . . . “Every American, including family business owners, should be free to live and do business according to their faith. For the time being, Hercules Industries will be able to do just that,” said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Bowman after the decision. Bowman added, “The cost of freedom for this family could be millions of dollars per year in fines that will cripple their business if the Obama administration ultimately has its way. This lawsuit seeks to ensure that Washington bureaucrats cannot force families to abandon their faith just to earn a living. Americans don’t want politicians and bureaucrats deciding what faith is, who the faithful are, and where and how that faith may be lived out.”

NCPA Policy Digest: The president and his economic team tend to dismiss the impact that such as tax hike will have on business activity because only 2 or 3 percent of taxpayers with business income are taxed at the highest rates, says Scott A. Hodge, president of the Tax Foundation. However, absent from these calculations (and crucial nonetheless) are the effects of such taxes on pass-through businesses that are responsible for substantial amounts of employment.

NC Register: The Alliance Defending Freedom legal group sought the injunction as part of its lawsuit on behalf of Hercules Industries, a Colorado-based manufacturer of heating, ventilation and air conditioning units. “We’re thrilled,” said Matt Bowman, legal counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom. “This is the first court to answer the question of whether Obamacare can be used to violate religious freedom, and the answer is ‘No,’” he told Catholic News Agency July 27. “The very first ruling on the question of religious freedom was a ruling stating that religious freedom prevails over government attempts to force believers to choose between their faith and their livelihood,” Bowman said.

FRC at PR Newswire on Market Watch: The Alliance Defending Freedom is representing the family in Newland v. Sebelius . . . Ken Klukowski, J.D., director of FRC’s Center for Religious Liberty, added: “While this is only the first round of litigation, this is a significant win as it reaffirms that millions of Americans cannot be coerced by the federal government into violating their religious faith. “Religious liberty goes far beyond merely the ‘freedom of worship’–an alarmingly narrow term the Obama administration has adopted–to include peacefully living out your faith in every area of life. For private business owners, that includes their right to showcase their faith through their business policies.”

Catholic News Agency: We’re thrilled,” said Matt Bowman, legal counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom. “This is the first court to answer the question of whether Obamacare can be used to violate religious freedom, and the answer is ‘no,’” he told CNA July 27. “The very first ruling on the question of religious freedom was a ruling stating that religious freedom prevails over government attempts to force believers to choose between their faith and their livelihood,” Bowman said.

Kathryn Jean Lopez at National Review: Matt Bowman is the legal counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, and today won an injunction in behalf of the Newland family of Denver, Colo. The Newlands are a Catholic family who run Hercules Industries, a business that distributes air-conditioning, heating, and ventilation supplies and does not provide contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs in its employee health plans. Without the injunction that was issued today by a Jimmy Carter–appointed judge, John Kane, the Department of Health and Human Services mandate requiring that coverage would have gone into effect, forcing them to choose between conscience and following this federal regulation (more here). Bowman explains the significance of the win . . .

Fox News (includes video): “Every American, including family business owners, should be free to live and do business according to their faith. For the time being, Hercules Industries will be able to do just that,” said Matt Bowman, legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, the Arizona-based organization representing the Newlands. “The bottom line is that Congress and the Constitution explicitly protect all religious freedom. They don’t exclude family businesses.” House Speaker John Boehner heralded the court’s ruling. “I join millions of my fellow Americans in welcoming this ruling, which is a major victory in the effort to restore the religious liberty that has been demolished by the Obama administration’s actions this year,” Boehner said.

Patheos: “Every American, including family business owners, should be free to live and do business according to their faith. For the time being, Hercules Industries will be able to do just that,” said Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. “The cost of freedom for this family could be millions of dollars per year in fines that will cripple their business if the Obama administration ultimately has its way. This lawsuit seeks to ensure that Washington bureaucrats cannot force families to abandon their faith just to earn a living. Americans don’t want politicians and bureaucrats deciding what faith is, who the faithful are, and where and how that faith may be lived out.”

Kristi Buron Brown at Live Action News: I participated in a moot court session where Mr. Bowman gave his arguments and clearly laid out the Newlands’ case. Lest anyone think that the Newlands do not provide well for their employees, Hercules Industries’ current health care plan goes above and beyond many plans in its provisions for women. Mr. Bowman’s arguments detail the health benefits given to pregnant women, those who miscarry, and those with other reproductive-related issues. All the Newlands want is the freedom to adhere to their own religious beliefs concerning abortion, contraception, and sterilization – something that the First Amendment allows.

One News Now: The lawsuit was filed by a family-owned business, Hercules Industries (see earlier story). Alliance Defense Fund (now known as Alliance Defending Freedom) argued the mandate violates the family’s religious beliefs.

A federal court issued an order Friday that halts enforcement of the Obama administration’s abortion pill mandate against a Colorado family-owned business while an Alliance Defending Freedom lawsuit challenging the mandate continues in court.

Heritage Foundation Culture Watch: Its attorneys at the Alliance Defending Freedom have requested an injunction barring the government’s enforcement of the mandate against the company by August 1, the date by which it would need to begin making changes to its plan to comply with the mandate.

Terry Jeffrey at Townhall: William, Paul and James Newland and their sister, Christine Ketterhagen, who together own Hercules Industries, have no right to conduct their family business in a manner that comports with their Catholic faith. The federal government can and will compel them to either surrender their business or to engage in activities the Catholic faith teaches are intrinsically immoral. This is exactly what President Barack Obama’s Justice Department told a U.S. district court in a formal filing last week . . . “It is well established that a corporation and its owners are wholly separate entities, and the Court should not permit the Newlands to eliminate that legal separation to impose their personal religious beliefs on the corporate entity or its employees,” said the Justice Department. This is just as if the Justice Department were to tell a family owned newspaper that it must publish editorials calling for a confiscatory estate tax, basing its coercion of the newspaper on the supposition (which lawyers for the Alliance Defending Freedom argue DOJ is by analogy making) that as a for-profit secular and incorporated employer, the paper has no First Amendment right to freedom of speech.