A federal judge in New York has blocked a Health and Human Services policy the Trump administration implemented in order to solidify First Amendment protection for doctors. The policy protected healthcare providers who refuse to provide abortions and cited religious objections. Nineteen states and two abortion groups filed a lawsuit in June following Trump’s announcement of the conscience protections, suing to have the policy overturned.
While the judge did not object to the issue of conscience protection, he did take issue with HHS issuing the policy, saying they’re abusing their power.
Law and Crime explained:
The federal judge, Paul Engelmayer, is an Obama appointee. It’s hard to look at this decision and see how it is not a result of appointing liberal activist judges to the federal bench. Or, to say it another way, this is why many skeptical conservatives still lobbied for a Trump presidency in 2016, instead of a Clinton administration. As it turns out, “But Gorsuch” is a real phenomenon with real consequences.
Of course, many conservatives vehemently disagreed with this judge’s ruling, such as Sen. Ted Cruz.
This ruling discards even the most basic protections of religious liberty in favor of extremist abortionist demands. Health care professionals who oppose abortion on moral or religious grounds should NEVER be forced to participate in infanticide. https://t.co/56YsHsrOy3
— Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) November 6, 2019
And in a statement, Stephanie Taub, senior counsel for First Liberty Institute, said:
Likewise, Nick Reaves, an attorney at Becket, tweeted about this case, recalling that their organization has a similar case ongoing, and noting that a federal judge in Texas ruled last month in a different case that conscience rights should be protected.
#BREAKING: A federal court just ruled against new regs meant to enforce longstanding bipartisan conscience protections allowing religious doctors to serve communities without being forced to perform procedures, such as abortions, that their faith forbids.https://t.co/TTuLhL4Gui pic.twitter.com/PfY7I4643a
— Nick Reaves (@NickRReaves) November 6, 2019
Doctors shouldn’t have to choose between giving up their faith and being forced out of their profession. In a diverse and free society, we can ensure that everyone will receive needed care without punishing doctors for having a conscience.
— Nick Reaves (@NickRReaves) November 6, 2019
The HHS is a government entity tasked with allocating funds and resources related to medicine, public health, and social services. It’s, of course, true that all federal bureaucracies are capable and often guilty of overreach, but if HHS can’t protect healthcare providers’ First Amendment rights, who should and who will?
The HHS is sometimes used by each political party in office as a weapon to enforce their political aims. Yet the best example of this is actually the Obama-era HHS. President Barack Obama used the HHS to repeatedly violate the First Amendment rights of religious people.
Remember the HHS mandate that required nuns to provide birth control? Where was the judge at that time willing to call out HHS for its blatant attempt to “rule by regulatory fiat?”
HHS never should have had to step in and protect the First Amendment rights of healthcare providers regarding abortion, just like nuns never should have had to object to the contraceptive mandate. This is not an example of HHS overreach, but of an activist judge allowing healthcare providers ‘ constitutional rights to be violated to settle a political score.
Nicole Russell (@russell_nm) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. She is a journalist who previously worked in Republican politics in Minnesota.
