Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

December-17-13

Court Allows NY Catholic Groups to Refuse Contraceptive Coverage

A federal judge ruled yesterday that a group of Catholic institutions in New York do not have to comply with the Affordable Care Act (ACA) contraceptive coverage requirement. The ACA guarantees that all new health insurance plans cover FDA-approved contraceptives, including the pill and IUDs, without co-pays or deductibles.

US District Judge Brian Cogan in Brooklyn ruled that the six plaintiffs - Archdiocese of New York, Catholic Health Care System, Catholic Health Services of Long Island, Diocese of Rockville Centre, Cardinal Spellman High School, and Monsignor Farrell High School - are exempt from the mandate because of their religious beliefs. This case is Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York v. Sebelius [PDF].

Although the ACA provision has helped thousands of US women obtain contraception - the proportion of women paying zero dollars for oral contraceptive pills increased from 15 to 40 percent since it went into effect - this ruling will make it harder for the more than 25,000 employees of the plaintiffs to obtain affordable contraception.

Several for-profit companies have also challenged the ACA contraceptive coverage requirement in federal courts. In November, the US Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge by Hobby Lobby, a for-profit national craft store chain, and Conestoga Wood, a wood cabinet manufacturer. Both are arguing that the requirement violates the religious beliefs of these corporations and that they should not be required to provide health insurance plans that cover certain types of birth control.

The Feminist Majority Foundation launched a petition to send the Supreme Court a clear message that companies should not be able to use religion as cover to discriminate against women. Sign our petition, leave stories,and tell the Court why birth control coverage matters to you! You can also share the petition online using the tag #MyBodyMyBC!

Media Resources: US District Court Eastern District of New York 12/16/13; RH Reality Check 12/16/13; Feminist Newswire 11/12/13, 11/26/13, 12/13/13; Bloomberg Business Week 12/15/13; Change.org


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

10/30/2014 Medication Abortion Access Threatened by Oklahoma Court Ruling - An Oklahoma state district court judge has refused to block a state law restricting medication abortion, clearing the way for the law to go into affect on November 1. The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, together with a local abortion clinic in Tulsa, challenged HB 2684 in September, arguing that the law was an unconstitutional restriction on non-surgical abortion in the earliest weeks of pregnancy. . . .
 
10/30/2014 UPS Switches Pregnant Worker Policy Ahead of Supreme Court Case - The United Parcel Service (UPS) is changing its policy on light duty assignments for pregnant workers, even though the company will stand by its refusal to extend accommodations to a former employee in an upcoming Supreme Court case. UPS announced on Monday in a memo to employees, and in a brief filed with the US Supreme Court, that the company will begin offering temporary, light-duty positions to pregnant workers on January 1, 2015. . . .
 
10/30/2014 North Dakota Medical Students Speak Out Against Measure 1 - Medical students at the University of North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences are asking North Dakotans to vote no on Measure 1, a personhood measure on the state ballot this fall. The students issued published a letter in the Grand Forks Herald stating that they opposed Measure 1 in part because they are against "the government's taking control of the personal health care decisions of its citizens." Nearly 60 UND School of Medicine students signed the letter, citing concerns over the "very broad and ambiguous language" used in the proposed amendment, which has no regard for serious and life-threatening medical situations such as ectopic pregnancies. Measure 1 would change the North Dakota state constitution to create an "inalienable right to life" for humans "at any stage of development" - including the moment of fertilization and conception. . . .