![]() ![]() Legally, the Supreme Court held that the corporations in the case could function as “persons” and hold religious beliefs under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Last year’s Hobby Lobby decision had both legal and practical implications. The current Federal regulations align the for-profit companies with the religiously affiliated nonprofits in getting a special “accommodation” from the government. The 2014 Hobby Lobby decision added certain for-profit companies to that list of potential religious refusers. Before Hobby Lobby, religious organizations (like houses of worship) and religiously affiliated nonprofits (like religiously affiliated universities) were the only employers that could get out of the ACA requirement. Those exemptions haven’t changed either.īut, the Hobby Lobby decision did change something pretty significant: it expanded the number of employers that can refuse to provide coverage for birth control due to a religious objection. ![]() Additionally, Federal regulations created an exemption to the ACA requirement for houses of worship and other religious institutions - they don’t have to provide birth control under their health insurance plans (since some religions prohibit using birth control). That requirement on insurers has not changed. The ACA still requires insurance plans to cover preventive health care services (including birth control) without any out-of-pocket costs. In this article, we describe what you can do, as an employee and consumer, if your employer refuses to cover birth control. For most people, switching jobs in order to work for an employer who doesn’t hold religious objections to contraception isn’t an option. Supreme Court landmark decision in Burwell v. Now, even for-profit companies can deny contraceptive coverage thanks to last year’s U.S. Taken from the September/October 2015 issue of the Women's Health Activist Newsletter.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |