• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Anti-Conscience Mandate Halted Against Second Family-Owned Business

    A second federal district court has granted a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of Obamacare’s conscience-crushing contraception mandate.

    Late Wednesday, Michigan Federal District Court Judge Robert H. Cleland ruled in favor of family-owned lawn and supply store Weingartz Supply Company and its owner, Daniel Weingartz. Colorado District Court Judge John L. Kanne granted a similar request on behalf of Hercules Industries this past summer.

    Weingartz Supply and its owner objected to the mandate’s requirement that they provide their employees abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraceptives in violation of the owner’s religious beliefs or risk crippling fines.

    Mr. Weingartz is committed to operating the family business in a manner compatible with his faith. Because the company is a private, for-profit family business, it is excluded from the mandate’s narrow religious exemption and, like all non-religious employers, is ineligible for a year-long “safe-harbor” that simply delays the religious freedom violations caused by the mandate. He sought the emergency injunction to ensure that the company could continue to provide health coverage for its employees while the litigation continues.

    Weighing the “unquestionable […] irreparable injury” posted by “the loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time,” Judge Cleland held that the government’s interest implementing the statute must yield to “the risk presented here of substantially infringing [Weingartz’s] sincere exercise of religious beliefs.”

    If the company had been unsuccessful in staying enforcement of the mandate against it, it would have faced a fine of $100 per day for each of its 170 employees for non-compliance with the mandate. Alternatively, it could have opted to drop coverage for its employees altogether and face the lesser, though not insubstantial, fine of approximately $2,000 per employee per year.

    The Weingartz family’s plight is an example of the coercive “incentives” built into Obamacare, which has concentrated broad powers in the hands of the federal government—a drastic and dangerous experiment. This gross government overreach even extends to commandeering religious employers into directly paying for drugs and services that violate their faith despite conscientious objections.

    This litigation—one of the nearly 40 cases involving more than 100 plaintiffs—is also another telling example of the Administration’s cramped view of religious liberty. In the Administration’s view, business owners must abandon their religious and moral convictions as a condition of participating in commerce. Accepting the Administration’s logic would limit the application of religious freedom to individuals alone acting within their houses of worship on weekends. It would reduce the free exercise of religion to “freedom of worship,” restricting religious believers’ ability to live out their faiths in their day-to-day lives.

    The case is another reminder of the necessity of repealing Obamacare and the assault on religious freedom and limited government it represents.

    Posted in Featured, Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    5 Responses to Anti-Conscience Mandate Halted Against Second Family-Owned Business

    1. KJinAZ says:

      ObamaCare was an overreach at all levels, in an attempt to force a later conservative compromise. We should NOT compromise our values ever. The Federal government needs to be shut down, instead of being the backstop for all redistribution plans. The states need to be responsible for themselves. The Federal Government is not the Federal Insurance Company that can fix eveyones needs. It doesn't work that way!

    2. Jeanne Stotler says:

      If I am right, Nurses and doctors will NOT be able to use religious believes to keep from assisting in abortions, etc, in hospitals, this will not affect MD’s in pvt.’ practice in most cases, BUT willaffect those in internsips and residencies, and nurses working on Me/Surg and OBGYN wards/floors. I have always refrained from this in the past and I am glad I am retired as I beieve in the sanctity of life.

    3. krish says:

      What about the beliefs of the employee? The employee essentially pays for insurance with his work. The employer is simply facilitating the insurance. If the employee does not have the same beliefs as the employer, why should they be denied their coverage?

      • savvy says:

        This is the argument that the administration wants you accept. The truth is that the HHS in order to proliferate mandated birth control, abortifacient and sterilization is attempting to use a distribution method and a cleaver tax increase (according to the S.C.) to get this stuff to the population for free. It is basically just a DISTRIBUTION METHOD.
        .
        Men and women with badges and guns behind them are ordering employers, universities and insurance companies to provide these things. There is no earning involved!

        You are only getting something that could just as well be distributed through a CVS pharmacy with a coupon, or, a reimbursement on your tax return, or, the condom window at the Post Office.

      • Lina says:

        The employee should recognize the beliefs of the employer that he or she CHOOSES to work for. If the employee doesn't like the benefits package offered, whether it be related to contraception coverage or how many vacation days he or she gets, the employee should weigh that before taking the job, not expect the company to change their strongly held religious beliefs. There are many, many other employers who would happily provide contraception coverage — the employee should work for them.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×