An interesting thought - Striking down Trump's immigration EO kill off Obamacare's contraceptive mandate? - Granite Grok

An interesting thought – Striking down Trump’s immigration EO kill off Obamacare’s contraceptive mandate?

Justice unblindedHas the Left sprung its own trap on its own feet that it didn’t know it laid all by themselves?  Remember all of the angst when Obama’s HHS decided that an “essential healthcare plan” had to include free contraceptives which also includes abortifacients?  Several organizations sued that it violated their First Amendment rights including Hobby Lobby.  Yet, Obama persisted and went after a most Catholic organization that protested that their religious beliefs said that abortion was murder – and Obama said that was not a religious stance that mattered?

Back to the “hoisted on his own petard” phrase (even as I bet that new HHS ” the Secretary shall” Tom Price may decide that regulation be pulled (reformatted, emphasis mine)?

Liberal Judges Unwittingly Declare ObamaCare Religious Mandate Unconstitutional

They don’t realize it, but liberals have just declared that Obama’s HHS mandate — which forced Catholics to cooperate with providing abortion and contraception — is unconstitutional. The new interpretation of the Establishment Clause espoused by the activist judges who are striking down Trump’s EO is that anything that has a disparate impact on a religious group is unconstitutional.

The rulings by activist judges declaring Trump’s EO on immigration to be unconstitutional were based on arguments that if the EO/law had a disparate impact on any faith, or that if the person behind the EO/law ever said anything that could be construed to violate the new liberal interpretation of the establishment clause, then the EO/law in question was unconstitutional.

Clearly since many religious groups believe that contraception and abortion are morally licit while the Catholic Church, and some Protestant denominations, believe that contraception and abortion are not morally licit any EO/law that requires funding contraception and abortion will have a disparate impact on Catholics since it forces them to violate their deeply held religious beliefs.

Goose, meet gander.  They’ve laid their own path to kill that mandate off IF Price holds off for a while (which means trouble of another sort for Trump and the Republicans if he does). It also gets better, for mere “chatter” of anti-Christianity should be sufficient to roll that back (and for which there is plenty of):

Further, even if liberals argue that the HHS mandate is not discriminatory on its face all conservatives have to do is show that anyone involved in generating it ever said anything negative about the Church’s stance on abortion to meet the criteria set by the activist judges.  After all the liberal judges admitted that Trump’s EO itself is not discriminatory but that because Trump supposedly said discriminatory things during the campaign the EO is unconstitutional.

And it goes further!

This newly found liberal orthodoxy is germane to other aspects of the liberal judicial agenda. For example saying that Christian bakers must supply cakes to gay weddings is clearly unconstitutional for two reasons, the first being that not all religions object to gay weddings, hence the ruling on the face of it violates the Establishment Clause by having a disparate impact on different faiths and second because supporters of the rulings forcing Christians to go against their beliefs have publicly stated that they disagree with those Christian’s beliefs.

Talk about hammer and nails!  And moves into school choice as well!

Another example is that under the new Establishment Clause interpretation any law that rejects school vouchers is unconstitutional. …Further, it’s a historical fact that the Blaine amendments banning financial support to religious schools were passed by lawmakers who openly declared that the objective was to prevent funding Catholic schools, which makes those laws unconstitutional under the new liberal view.

Hah!

>