The Hobby Lobby case was a religious victory against the Obama contraception mandate, but it’s no longer the only reason groups are allowed to be exempted.
On Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon ruled that March for Life could claim secular reasons for being exempted from the contraception mandate.
March for Life is a pro-life group, and has been putting on the March for Life event each year in Washington, D.C. since 1974 to bring attention to abortion and overturning Roe v. Wade.
The Hill reported that Judge Leon based his ruling according to the constitutional guarantee of equal protection for those religious and non-religious alike. March for Life “being excised from the fold” was referred to as “nothing short of regulatory favoritism.”
Leon challenged the purpose of the exemption for religious grounds:
He also made the interesting point that employees of religious organizations, and those like March for Life, are less likely to want to use contraception anyways.
March for Life released a statement calling their victory “the first one to be granted in favor of an organization opposed to the mandate for pro-life reasons based on science and moral convictions rather than religion.”
Their lawyers spoke on the issue as it pertained to the government forcing the organization to act contradictory to their mission:
Past victories against the contraception mandate have been victories for religious liberties, but now there are victories for “moral convictions” as well.
Why the Obama administration ever needed to force pro-life and religious groups to provide contraception, including abortifacients, still make little sense. These victories may challenge that requirement.
However, with the decision likely to be appealed, time shall tell how it all unfolds.
