Justice Alito’s opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson struck down Roe v. Wade by ignoring five decades of reliance on that decision. His final opinion reflected… Read More »Abortion and the Shameful Consequences of Dobbs v. Jackson
Indeed, it is difficult to imagine any precedents immune to critical reconsideration through the Court’s ideological prism. RINOcracy.com May 9, 2022 It had been widely… Read More »Abortion: Justice Alito’s Draft Opinion
On June 30, The Supreme Court issued an opinion in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius (collectively Hobby Lobby) invalidating regulations under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that require that insurance provided by employers cover a broad range of contraceptive medications and devices. The employers in each case objected to coverage for four specific types of contraceptives that they consider to be abortifacients, i.e., causing an abortion. The employers claimed that the requirement to provide that coverage infringed their rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). A five-justice majority of the Court agreed in an opinion by Justice Alito. The immediate controversy over the decision was quickly heightened when, three days later,the Court entered a preliminary stay in Wheaton College v. Burwell relieving Wheaton, a Christian college, of complying with an alternative procedure that the Court had appeared to endorse in Hobby Lobby.Read More »Blog No. 42. Contraceptive Confusion: The Puzzlements of Hobby Lobby and Wheaton