Tag Archives: ZZ: Korte v. Sebelius

Ed Whelan at National Review: There are two good reasons why the DOJ attorney’s argument that vindicating the RFRA rights of the business owners would violate the Establishment Clause was an “unexpected twist.” First, DOJ never made that argument in either of its Seventh Circuit briefs in the two cases. Second, there is good reason that it didn’t, for the argument is inane.

Religion Clause Blog: The second case argued yesterday was Grote v. Sebelius. (Audio of the full oral argument.) In the case an Indiana federal district court refused to grant a preliminary injunction to a for-profit business that manufactures vehicle safety systems and its Catholic owners who claim that their religious liberty rights are infringed by the mandate.

Washington Post: By the government’s own estimate, that means 100 million Americans might not have contraceptive coverage, said Matt Bowman, an Alliance Defending Freedom lawyer representing the Grotes in one of the two cases heard Wednesday. That could undercut the government’s argument that the need to carry out the mandate is so compelling it trumps the couple’s religious beliefs.

Chicago Tribune: Grote Industries, a Catholic-owned manufacturer of vehicle safety and lighting systems in Madison, Ind., made similar arguments before the Seventh Circuit on Wednesday, adding that the distinction between a company and its owner or controlling shareholders exists for “some purposes, but not moral purposes.” “No doubt here the Grote family is being forced to choose,” lawyer Matthew Bowman argued. If they choose to disobey the mandate, they “forfeit the benefits of doing business at all according to their morality.” | Hat tip: How Appealing

Ken Klukowski at Breitbart: On Dec. 28, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled that the HHS Mandate violates this family’s religious liberty as guaranteed by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Kathleen Sebelius’ mandate could be argued to violate the First Amendment as well, but if a court can resolve a case by looking to a statute, it will avoid issuing an opinion regarding constitutional issues. The Seventh Circuit has issued an injunction while the appeal in this case, Korte v. Sebelius, is pending.

How Appealing reports on the ruling in Korte v. Sebelius.