Hobby Lobby doesn't want to cover its employees' birth control on company insurance plans. In fact, they're so outraged about women having access to birth control that they've taken the issue all the way to the Supreme Court.
I cannot believe that we live in a world where we would even consider letting some big corporation deny the women who work for it access to the basic medical tests, treatments or prescriptions that they need based on vague moral objections.
But here's the scary thing: With the judges we've got on the Supreme Court, Hobby Lobby might actually win.
The current Supreme Court has headed in a very scary direction.
Recently, three well-respected legal scholars examined almost 20,000 Supreme Court cases from the last 65 years. They found that the five conservative justices currently sitting on the Supreme Court are in the top 10 most pro-corporate justices in more than half a century.
And Justices Samuel Alito and John Roberts? They were number one and number two.
Take a look at the win rate of the national Chamber of Commerce cases before the Supreme Court. According to the Constitutional Accountability Center, the Chamber was winning 43% of the cases in participated in during the later years of the Burger Court, but that shifted to a 56% win-rate under the Rehnquist Court, and then a 70% win-rate with the Roberts Court.
Follow these pro-corporate trends to their logical conclusion, and pretty soon you'll have a Supreme Court that is a wholly owned subsidiary of big business.
Warren goes on to warn that this could just be the beginning and that future rulings could be even worse. You know because I was not already freaked out enough.
And she's right.
This court was packed with conservative big business sycophants, who seem to care less about the law then they do political ideology. And isn't it always the OTHER side complaining about "activist judges?"
I hate to wish for any ill to come to anybody, but perhaps the best thing for the future of this country is for Justice Scalia or Justice Thomas to choke to death on a chicken bone so that President Obama, or President Hillary, can put some young whippersnapper with a strong heart and a progressive outlook to take their place.
As it is there really is a fairly reasonable chance that this decision might actually come down on the side of Hobby Lobby. Which in my opinion should remove any doubt that the Supreme court is now a subsidiary of big business and religious zealots.
What is our recourse, as citizens, to unseat clearly corrupt Supreme Court justices? Is there any oversight on their decisions at all?
ReplyDeleteHey Gryph, if you are going down the path of 'anti' pro-corporate-big-business that tramples on the rights of it's employees, just a gentle reminder that your fave, Hillary, sat on the board of directors for Wallmart for six years- all during which time they were fighting (and still are) unions seeking to represent the workers. You don't hear much from Hillary on this subject these days though.
ReplyDeleteOkay valid point.
DeleteSo in order to protect your liberal sensibilities you can vote for the Green party candidate, or the Independent candidate, while the rest of the grownups vote for the most progressive candidate with the best chance of winning.
Because all of us recognize that we need to make sure that if any Justice's need to be added to the Supreme Court that we would much rather have them added by Hillary Clinton rather than Jeb Bush, that she is our best chance of improving and protecting Obamacare, and that she will work to vastly improve the economy.
I remember in 2000 when a lot of liberals "voted their conscience" and checked the ballot for Ralph Nader which helped George Bush steal the election and send thousands of Americans to their death, introduce domestic spying, and virtually destroy our way of life.
Well I'm not a liberal so I don't have those sensibilities to protect.
DeleteLet me get this straight, the 'grown up' way to vote, is to vote with- and follow the herd- for either candidate of the 2 major political parties? That is the grown up vote? That really doesn't seem like much of a vote of choice at all past the primaries.
I forget the name, but there was an old quote from a Russian politico that went something along the lines of: "the only difference between the Soviet Union and the United States, is that in the United States, people 'think' they have a choice". Get it?
I agree, the Bush administration did more accelerated damage to our country than any other in my lifetime. However, the domestic abuses they accelerated thru the use of wartime politics was already going on here, and continues to go on. Has the Obama admin done anything to stop it? No, it continues and has only grown larger and larger, see NSA, drone strikes on US citizens, etc. And we only get lip service in return that somehow we are to just trust that they are doing it better than the last guy. It is all big government Gryph- the differences are really just around the edges.
I did not vote for Nader but it really irks me when people seem to think it cost the election. Maybe the rest of the US needs to wake up and stop voting for the two parties which is really just one.
Maybe the truth is, that enough liberals did not vote for Ralph Nader. He would have been better than Al Gore and for sure George Bush.
DeleteExcellent post 10:39 am.....
DeleteI was going to say much the same thing, but you said it much more eloquently.
Maybe the real problem wasn't that too many people voted for Nader and gave the election to Bush. Maybe it was that too many people voted for Gore and Bush and the "in" group won again.
The electoral college decides who will be POTUS, why even bother to vote at all? I know my state is going Red regardless of whether I waste my time voting for POTUS or not. As we've seen recently the elections that matter are the House and Senate elections. If you have a party in control of both House and Senate it matters little who is POTUS.
DeleteProblem remains that people tend to come out and cast a worthless vote for POTUS, yet stay home during midterm and local elections. The voting populace has placed their voices in the wrong place, in the wrong elections. Your representative Democracy lies within the the Legislative Branch, not the Executive Branch. If you're going to stay home, stay home for the general, but make sure to vote in the midterms.
Those of you who are convinced there's no difference between having a Dem or GOP President (and Dem or GOP-controlled Senate) will have a tough time arguing that there's no difference between Justice Ginsburg and Justice Scalia.
DeleteAnon 12:18 - State, local, and all three branches of the federal government matter and impact our lives. Voting in all elections matters unless there's only one person on the ballot.
I've always admired Ralph Nader, but he was running for President. Nobody can be so foolish to believe that a President Nader would be able to get Congress and the Senate to pass bills to support his agenda. A President by themselves doesn't have a whole lot of power, they got to get the others on board. People have to compromise to move forward.
DeleteYou needn't wish for actual harm, just the kind of near-miss that makes a man decide that life is too short to spend it in a little black dress behind a fancy desk.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I'm hoping for a non-fatal plane crash or a near-drowning.
Mother Jones seems to think the Chamber of Commerce is on the government side in this issue.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/03/hobby-lobby-supreme-court-obamacare
The ACA should never have given churches and church organizations an exemption for providing health insurance with contraception coverage.
That was the beginning of the slippery slope and the ACA screwed this up horribly. I live in a little town in Alaska where our only hospital option is Providence. Unfortunately, apathy reigns and we are stuck locally with Taliban-like women’s reproductive health care. I still have had no answer from the hospital or the borough who leases the hospital to Providence how this shakes out when a woman arrives for care after being raped. This issue makes everyone squirm. It is time for women to stand up and speak out again and honor the women who spoke up before us!
Delete"The ACA should never have given churches and church organizations an exemption for providing health insurance with contraception coverage. "
Delete*****
Exactly! And now "She" has to deal with the fallout b/c its totally unconstitutional. But they exempted Nuns so now everyone wants to be exempted and discriminatory. CLUSTERFUCK!
I fear what this country will become in 5, 10 or 15 years if these theocratic morons are allowed to run amok and tap dance all over the separation of church and state. Will we all be required to go to an "approved" house of worship every Sunday and tithe most of our earnings? Will women be forced to live as voiceless chattel and baby factories? Will we be fighting off armed Warriors for Jeebus in the streets? How about people of religions, cultures, ethnicities other than white, ultra-conservative Xtians?
ReplyDeleteMost of all--why is NO ONE really stressing all of this before the elections in November?
There are a number of problems that the Hobby Lobby case raises:
ReplyDelete1. Does the religious belief of the owner of the company trump the religious beliefs of his employees?
2. Birth control is not abortion. There are forms of birth control which prevent ovulation. No egg, no fertilization, no baby, no abortion.
3. What happens when a doctor prescribes a medication for his patient to save her life-- and the company's religious belief is to put it in God's hand?
4. Some of the justices raised the points that another company's owner may object to vaccinations, blood transfusions, artificial fertilization, or any other number of medical procedures.
5. What happens when the owner is a Christian Scientist and does not believe in seeing a doctor or dentist. Can he object to having to provide medical and dental plans for his employees?
Exactly. While I greatly respect E. Warren, and we do have the most extreme court ever, there is tons of precedent for not allowing an employer to make personal decisions for its employee that harms them, monetarily, physically or religiously. The slippery slope here is huge, and even Scalia and Roberts should be able to see that, even if they seem to have a hard time understanding basic biology.
DeleteEverything in Hobby Lobby's case is a lie. They are objecting to two morning after pills and two IUDs calling them abortifacients. They are NOT. They prevent conception.
DeleteSo Hobby Lobby is a person with rights. Let God damns it's eternal soul to Hell. bwhahahaha
Here's some more irony for you...... or hypocrisy if you prefer.
ReplyDeletehttps://aattp.org/hobby-lobby-hypocrites-buy-most-inventory-from-family-planning-capital-of-the-world-china/
Sorry, but you're a couple of days behind on that piece of news.
DeleteYeah, and if they are so pro-life how can they justify these purchases from a country that culturally favors boys over girls and promotes abortion after pregnancy gender screening? What a horrible business. Will never shop there.
DeleteAs an outsider, I think the biggest problem you have with the Supreme Court is that justices are appointed for life terms. Add to that the fact that, regardless of which side of the aisle you're on, the President selects someone whose political views side with his/her own.
ReplyDeletePerhaps some problems could be eliminated if judges were limited to a term of, say, 15 years, with mandatory retirement at age 75. And judges should be selected on a strict non-partisan basis, having no affiliation - formal or otherwise - with any political party.
Otherwise, you simply have a Supreme Court (such as you now have) where political bias seems to be their first consideration in adjudicating cases before them.
Hobby Lobby is just blowing smoke. If they truly believed in their preciously held beliefs, they wouldn't be buying crap from a country that supports state sanctioned abortion. They wouldn't be buying crap from a country that overlooks the fact that the products are made in sweat shops, on the backs of kids. These hypocrites have been providing contraception to their employees for years, in states like California and Massachusetts, which require it be included. No problem with it till a black man is in office. God, these people drive me nuts.
ReplyDeleteThey had no problem at all with their insurance coverage until the ACA was passed. Then they used it as an excuse to try to break the ACA. There are no ethical or moral values involved...it's 'get the black guy'.
DeleteIf Hobby Lobby is all that religious, that would be holding prayer meetings and blessings. Then, as a religious institution, they wouldn't have to pay taxes.
DeleteIt's all about the Almighty dollar and Ho Lo's profits. They don't give a shit as long as they make and keep as much of their profits as possible. Same holds true for every other store, but they aren't bitching about their "beliefs" while counting their money.
DeleteThey see a crack of light with the supreme court as it is and what they see as "exceptions" made for religions. I read they're against iud's and the morning after pills, which have nothing to do with abortion.
Send Scalia and Thomas egg, butter and cream loaded deserts like Palin likes to push and clog those arteries! Scalia is overweight and old already and he and Thmas are both Koch tools, who should never have been on the court. The current court is loaded with Koch lovers.
ReplyDeleteYeah, she's right. The Ho Lo folks see this Supreme Court and it's makeup, and figure now's the best time to go for it. Scalia and Alito are in their pockets, Clarence Thomas is another shoe in. He should have recused himself with Citizen's United since his wife is a teabagging sockpuppet. What bothers me most is Ho Lo will take this as a green light to discriminate when hiring and think it's fine. Who'd hire a godless woman whose health care includes birth control, when they have a steady stream of fine christian women willing to join the pro life cause?
ReplyDeleteWhile Senator Warren's heart is in the right place and she's got the right idea, she does have her facts wrong. The article to which she refers didn't look at 20,000 Supreme Court cases - the Supremes don't listen to more than 100 cases a year, actually more like 75-80 on average. The article itself is at http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/EpsteinLanderPosner_MLR.pdf, and they used a dataset of 1,759 cases representing 15,782 votes of Justices. That's in Table 1. If Senator Warren or any of her staff read this, I'm the best fact-checker in the business, I admire the Senator's values and convictions, and I'm available - I can help keep her from making that sort of very public mistake in the future.
ReplyDeleteGlenn Beck should not be sued,he should be shot.
ReplyDelete