Imagine with me you are a woman working as a cashier at your local Hobby Lobby. Your hourly wage of ten dollars goes towards feeding your three children. Barely able to provide for the children you already have, the thought of a bigger family terrifies you. Since 2012 the idea of having unwanted children has been an anxiety for women who work at Hobby Lobby. That year the company, which operates upon Christian principles, challenged the Affordable Care Act in the Supreme Court. Hobby Lobby argued that having to provide contraceptive coverage for their employees is a violation of their freedom of religious expression. The issue was ignited in October of 2010 when President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into …show more content…
Hobby Lobby in concern, worried that they too would get denied contraceptive coverage if their boss was of a strong conservative and religious affiliation. In a five-four decisions, the Supreme Court ruled that Hobby Lobby could be exempt from employee coverage of contraception under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. It is important to understand that all three of the women in the Supreme Court voted against the ruling. One can deduct that if the Supreme Court was composed half of women (like the country is), the ruling for Hobby Lobby would not have been made and women’s rights would not have been …show more content…
In the 2016 Supreme Court Case of Zubik v. Burwell, a unanimous decision led the Supreme Court to rule that religiously affiliated organizations are to argue contraceptive coverage requirements with on a lower court level. Fortunately for women, appellate courts (the Court of Appeals and several District Courts) agreed with Justice Ginsburg that the contraction mandate does not affect the Green family’s exercise of religious freedom. The courts declared that the family must abide by the laws stated in the Affordable Care Act, and if utilizing contraception contradicts their views they do not have to take
It is important, of course, to note that the Supreme Court was not able to immediately create and implement desegregation policy, because the Court does face constraints in the area of local implementation. However, the Brown decision was crucial for the success of the desegregation movement, because it supported the Civil Rights Act and provided a precedent for later decisions like Green that would help to implement the ruling at the district level. The courts were thus able to make decisions in this policy area that profoundly shaped the way that civil rights policy developed in the United States, as the courts were enabled to create successful policy in the area of school desegregation because of the combined influence of federal court
On June 7th 1965, married couples in the State of Connecticut received the right to acquire and benefit from contraceptive devises. In a majority decision by the United States Supreme Court, seven out of the nine judges believed that sections 53-32 and 54-196 of the General Statues of Connecticut , violated the right of privacy guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The case set precedence by establishing marital (and later constitutional) privacy, and had notable influence on three later controversial ruling=s in Roe v. Wade (1973), Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) and Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) . The issue at hand was, and is still, one that still causes debate, wether a state has the authority to restrict the use and sale of contraceptives. Though it is not contraceptives, anymore, that is at the heart of the abortion debate, this ruling was the first step to the expectation of constitutional privacy.
First, it is imperative to comprehend the implications of the case Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby. This court case is still in litigation and pertains to the Fourteenth Amendment, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), religious freedom, and woman’s access to contraceptives. The ACA requires all insurance companies to cover forms of female birth control. The ACA also requires l...
In 2010, President Obama signed into law the Affordable Care Act in order to bring reform to the current healthcare system. The law was designed to provide healthcare coverage for people that did not have access to healthcare, improve the quality of the types of healthcare provided, and contain costs (HHS, 2014). Some of the features of the law are:
When the Supreme Court attained its verdict in Roe v. Wade, it brought up decades of law, which first instituted that the government could not impede on people's personal affairs about reproduction, marriage, or any other feature in their personal life. In this case it was evident that the Supreme Court wasn’t going to conserve the Natural Law, which was a body of unchanging moral principles regarded as a basis for all human conduct.... ... middle of paper ... ... [22] They next referred to the Emolument Clause and to the Electors provisions, which would also exclude most children and anyone unable to “[hold] any office of Profit or Trust.
Overall, the ruling in this case was a perfect interpretation of the Constitution. Despite opposition claiming that it is not addressed in the Constitution, too few rights are ever addressed in the Constitution of the United States. That is why there is a thing called Judicial Review. By utilizing judicial review, the interpreters of the law –Supreme Court, may make changes to policies and laws. Abortion, medicinal marijuana, and marriage fall under the umbrella of Equal Protection since they correspond to the rights and liberties of US citizens.
No other element of the Women’s Rights Movement has generated as much controversy as the debate over reproductive rights. As the movement gained momentum so did the demand for birth control, sex education, family planning and the repeal of all abortion laws. On January 22, 1973 the Supreme Court handed down the Roe v. Wade decision which declared abortion "fundamental right.” The ruling recognized the right of the individual “to be free from unwanted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the right of a woman to decide whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.” (US Supreme Court, 1973) This federal-level ruling took effect, legalizing abortion for all women nationwide.
In 1973, in what has become a landmark ruling for women’s rights, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a woman’s right to an abortion. Ever since, individual states have adopted, altered, and/or mutilated the edict to fit their agendas – Texas included. However, the decision made by the justices in Roe v. Wade didn’t set clear cut, inarguable demarcation lines, which has allowed the fiery debate to consume the nation. Rather than establishing a legal ruling of what life is, or is not, the Supreme Court has remained silent on the issue.
As women, it is important to remember that the reproductive freedoms we now have can be easily taken away. Some people take for granted the accessibility to birth control, condoms, and abortion. President Bush has initiated policies since coming into office that threaten women’s choices. As the Bush administration takes over, it is important for women and men to come together to support women’s rights. “Bush is setting a tone for anti-choice legislation, so I expect that any legislator who is anti-choice will put something in this year,” said Jessica Morgan, president of the Baltimore chapter of the National Organization for Women (Koenig, B2). Legislative, executive, and judicial action can very possibly come together during this administration to limit or eliminate women’s reproductive freedom.
The Roe v. Wade case originated in the state of Texas in 1970 at the suggestion of Sarah Weddington an Austin attorney. Norma McCorvey otherwise known as "Jane Roe" was an unmarried pregnant woman seeking to overturn the anti-abortion law in the state of Texas. The lawsuit claimed that the statue was unconstitutionally vague and abridged privacy rights of pregnant women guaranteed by the first, fourth, fifth, ninth, and fourteenth amendments to the constitution. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade)
Abortion is a topic that many don’t want to discuss. It’s a very personal decision that many women have to make each day, but in certain states, getting an abortion was becoming an even more difficult process. Not only did women have to decide to get an abortion that alone is a difficult choice, they now had to wait 24 hours, minors had to get consent, and/or inform the father of the child. But after all of this process, what if a woman couldn’t receive all of this? Would she be denied her right to get an abortion? The Supreme Court case, Planned Parenthood of PA v. Casey, wasn’t known for what it did, but mainly for what it did not do, which was not overruling Roe v. Wade, but reaffirming a woman’s right to an abortion; it questioned a state’s right to impose or place an “undue burden” on women.
There is an ongoing debate on the topic of how to fix the health care system in America. Some believe that there should be a Single Payer system that ensures all health care costs are covered by the government, and the people that want a Public Option system believe that there should be no government interference with paying for individual’s health care costs. In 1993, President Bill Clinton introduced the Health Security Act. Its goal was to provide universal health care for America. There was a lot of controversy throughout the nation whether this Act was going in the right direction, and in 1994, the Act died. Since then there have been multiple other attempts to fix the health care situation, but those attempts have not succeeded. The Affordable Care Act was passed in the senate on December 24, 2009, and passed in the house on March 21, 2010. President Obama signed it into law on March 23 (Obamacare Facts). This indeed was a step forward to end the debate about health care, and began to establish the middle ground for people in America. In order for America to stay on track to rebuild the health care system, we need to keep going in the same direction and expand our horizons by keeping and adding on to the Affordable Care Act so every citizen is content.
Controversy and arguments that were setbacks in the ongoing battle for women’s rights, specifically the right to an abortion, were put to slight a rest with the landmark verdict of Roe v. Wade. The revolution in reproductive rights caused by Roe v. Wade evolved from a spark in the hearts of women everywhere. When women claimed their rights as humans, that was when the face of women’s equality in all aspects started to change. The case of Roe v. Wade was the official legalization of a woman’s constitutional right to get an abortion in the United States, but the aftermath of any case is what makes or breaks the future laws and regulations. Through all of the restrictions, regulations, and loopholes, Roe v. Wade’s verdict stuck and continued to
Robert Creamer. "Protecting Access to Birth Control Does Not Violate Religious Freedom." Current Controversies: Politics and Religion. Ed. Debra A. Miller. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. Lee’s Summit High School. 31 Oct. 2013
In March 2010, under the Obama administration, the United States enacted major health-care reform. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010 expands coverage to the majority of uninsured Americans, through: (a) subsidies aimed at lower-income individuals and families to purchase coverage, (b) a mandate that most Americans obtain insurance or face a penalty,