Upload
morgan-hogan
View
19
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The Human Rights Implications of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. & Conestoga Wood Specialties Store v. Burwell. Katrina Anderson, Senior Human Rights Counsel, Center for Reproductive Rights July 17, 2014. CENTRAL HOLDING: As applied to closely-held corporations, - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
The Human Rights Implications of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores
Inc. & Conestoga Wood Specialties Store v. Burwell
Katrina Anderson, Senior Human Rights Counsel, Center for Reproductive Rights
July 17, 2014
CENTRAL HOLDING:
As applied to closely-held corporations,HHS regulations enforcing the ACA’s contraception mandate violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
DIRECT RESULT:
“Closely held” corporations can deny their employees insurance coverage for certain forms of FDA-approved birth control.
THE DISSENT:
1. Harm to women.2. Imposes boss’ beliefs on
employees.3. Consequences beyond
contraception (“the minefield”).
HUMAN RIGHTS LAW:
- Women’s access to contraception is a fundamental human right
- Access takes priority- Objection is possible where there is
direct involvement in procedure- Individuals can conscientiously
object, not institutions
OPPOSITION LAW BRIEF:
- Counsel of Record: Brigham Young University School of Law
- Amici: Institutions specializing in law and religion and individual experts on international and comparative law
- Argument: international law protects “collective religious rights”
What’s next?