Today, the ACLJ asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take a case involving a challenge to the ObamaCare HHS Mandate – urging the high court to permit companies and corporations to bring religious liberty claims in challenging the Mandate.
“This is a critical issue that needs to be addressed by the Supreme Court,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. “To protect the rights of individuals, but shut out companies and corporations from religious freedom protections is legally flawed. Businesses must be afforded the same opportunity to exercise a fundamental liberty protected by the First Amendment. Religious liberty must apply to businesses as well as individuals. It’s our hope the high court will take this case and reach that conclusion.”
Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in favor of Francis and Philip Gilardi, owners of Freshway Foods of Sidney, Ohio. The court held that the so-called “HHS Mandate” – a regulation requiring businesses to include in their health plans coverage for contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs or face massive penalties – places a substantial burden on the religious beliefs of business owners whose religious beliefs forbid them to pay for those services.
The court, however, rejected the Gilardis’ argument that their companies – Freshway Foods and Fresh Unlimited – are entitled to bring religious liberty claims themselves. The court said it had “no basis for concluding a secular corporation can exercise religion.”
In today’s filing, the ACLJ – which has filed 7 cases in federal court including the Gilardi case – noted that there’s a split in the lower courts concerning the issue of protecting the religious freedom rights of companies and corporations and urged the high court to take the case.
“Clearly, the lower courts are at odds with one another as to who has standing to challenge the Mandate, whose religious exercise is substantially burdened by the Mandate, and whether a secular or for-profit corporation has any religious exercise rights at all,” the ACLJ argues. “Given these conflicting decisions, and the fact that the Mandate impacts the exercise of a fundamental liberty protected by the First Amendment, there cannot be a more compelling case or controversy warranting this Court’s intervention.”
The ACLJ represents Francis A. Gilardi, Jr. and Philip M. Gilardi, two brothers who own and control two companies that are involved in the processing, packaging, and transportation of fresh produce. The companies include: Freshway Foods, a nearly 25 year old family-owned fresh produce processor and packer, which serves 23 states and has 340 full-time employees. Also represented: Freshway Logistics - a family-owned for-hire carrier of mainly refrigerated products serving 23 states for the last 10 years with approximately 55 full-time employees. Both companies are located in Sidney, Ohio; a city in west-central Ohio located about 40 miles north of Dayton.
The owners, who are Catholic, contend that the HHS Mandate, requiring coverage for contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs, violates their religious beliefs.
As we approach the one year anniversary of the Hobby Lobby decision , where the Supreme Court held that the HHS Mandate violated the religious liberties of business owners, it’s clear that the struggle to vindicate religious freedom and the right to conscience is far from over. Having said that,
Today the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could cripple ObamaCare. The Supreme Court has a critical opportunity to reject IRS regulations that illegally authorize tax subsidies for purchasers of health insurance on federal healthcare exchanges. The ACLJ has filed an amicus...
After his “glib” apology before Congress this week for calling the American people “stupid,” ObamaCare architect Jonathan Gruber attempted to dodge, duck, dip, dive, and … dodge every substantive question that came his way. He refused to answer even the simplest questions like how much ( millions )
From day one, we have warned that the real danger of Obamacare is not in the 2,700 pages of its text (as bad as they are), but in the hundreds of thousands of pages of rules and regulations that would flow out of that text. This week provides yet another example of that danger, and it is in the...