The Roberts Court is poised to clarify what employers must do to accommodate pregnant workers on the job. This could be terrible news.
A ruling late Thursday shows that the Supreme Court’s decision in the Hobby Lobby case was as much a political decision as a legal one.
Fourteen faith leaders, including many who have been allies of the administration, are urging the president to include a religious exemption in his upcoming executive order that will ban federal contractors from employment discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation.
Wheaton College, a religiously affiliated nonprofit, has asked for an emergency order exempting it from complying with the accommodation to the contraception benefit in the Affordable Care Act.
Monday’s Hobby Lobby ruling is one more piece of evidence that we still do not value women’s rights in the same way that we value “universal rights”—that is, rights that pertain to men.
Amid the anguish over the Hobby Lobby ruling Monday was a note of optimism among some liberals, suggesting that the ruling was constructed with a narrowness that specifically prohibits use of its legal reasoning to protect religiously inspired discrimination against LGBT people. If only that was in fact the case.
The Hobby Lobby decision is an affront to all women and yet another barrier to Asian American and Pacific Islander women who already face significant health disparities and barriers to insurance access.
In a series of orders issued Tuesday, the Supreme Court let stand lower court rulings upholding religious objections to providing any contraceptive coverage under the Affordable Care Act.
The decision did not strike the contraceptive benefit in the Affordable Care Act entirely, but it did leave it hobbled.
In striking a Massachusetts buffer zone law, the U.S. Supreme Court has dramatically reframed the debate over balancing the rights of patients and providers with the rights of abortion protesters.