I have read Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dissent to the ruling in Hobby Lobby by the Fascist Five Injustices of SCROTUS (Republican Constitutional VD). I recommend that you read it too (link follows). As an easier reference found an article with an excellent summary of ten key points.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a scathing 35-page dissent in the disastrous 5-4 Supreme Court decision Monday granting corporations First Amendment religious rights to deny women birth control coverage. The court had ventured far out in to unprecedented territory by granting private companies the right to be exempt from laws their owners don’t agree with. Crazy! In their zeal to deny women access to reproductive healthcare, expand the rights of corporations and hurt Obamacare, "The court," she wrote, "has ventured into a minefield."
Sadly, her clear-eyed reasoning did not sway the Court’s five arch conservatives, but it is worth reading her dissent here (starts on page 60.)
For those in a bigger hurry, here are highlights:
1. "Would the exemption…extend to employers with religiously grounded objections to blood transfusions (Jehovah’s Witnesses); antidepressants (Scientologists); medications derived from pigs, including anesthesia, intravenous fluids, and pills coated with gelatin (certain Muslims, Jews, and Hindus); and vaccinations[?]…Not much help there for the lower courts bound by today’s decision."
2. "Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be ‘perceived as favoring one religion over another,’ the very ‘risk the [Constitution’s] Establishment Clause was designed to preclude."
3. "Religious organizations exist to foster the interests of persons subscribing to the same religious faith. Not so of for-profit corporations. Workers who sustain the operations of those corporations commonly are not drawn from one religious community." … [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Alternet>
I have shared three to the articles ten highlights. Click through for the other seven. I not only agree with Ginsberg in sll ten highlights, but also with her entire dissent.
14 Responses to “Ginsburg’s Dissent”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
She wrote a brilliant dissent which I shared on Facebook the other day.
God Bless Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg!
Sadly, she's absolutely right. This, along with Citizens United are the absolute TWO WORST RULINGS in my lifetime.
And the Pandora's Box it will open is a wormhole we won't see the end of for decades – if ever!
Word is the Five Catholic Caliphates of the Court have penned a new article:
I never thought I would be ble to say this, but SCROTUS is even worse than the Taney Court.
Excellent article in the AlterNet – thanks TC. I do disagree with Justrice Ginsberg here though "“The Court does not even begin to explain how one might go about ascertaining the religious scruples of a corporation where shares are sold to the public. No need to speculate on that, the Court says, for ‘it seems unlikely’ that large corporation ‘will often assert RFRA claims.’” " – the Court does not appear to realise that Corporations are NOT people and cannot have religious scruples! (Yes, I know Justce Ginsberg knows really – it just didn't appear there).
The 5 justices ruled according to prejudice and self interest and not according to law, it seems to me – and prejudice made them blind to Justice Ginsberg's excellent reasoning – and they always will be.
There's also an excellent article on AlterNet on Hobby Lobby from an academic who worked there for three months http://www.alternet.org/economy/i-worked-hobby-lobby-and-saw-troubling-world-corporate-christianity
Thank you Pat A, 🙄
Thanks Pat! Excellent!
Not much to add here. Except how important it is to keep the White House and the Senate in the hands of Democrats. Which we can only do by voting. And getting other sane people out to vote.
More evidence that money = Speech, sadly… 😥
I shared this on FAcebook. Too many fundamentalist Christians are celebrating this ruling without giving a thought to other possible outcomes from it. I am sure none of them want to submit to Sharia law at their workplace. Vote, vote, vote, and Vote Democratic. The only solution I can see to override the right wing domination of our current Scrotus.
"The court had ventured far out in to unprecedented territory by granting private companies the right to be exempt from laws their owners don’t agree with."
What would this ruling mean to a private company/corporation which expressed a religious conflict with paying taxes . . . you know, that render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's stuff . . . when it disagrees with rendering unto Ceasar?
I find this particular case interesting and wonder if the court will be forced to review its decision. As I understand, Hobby Lobby's benefit package included contraceptive care for some time but it only became a "moral objection" when Obamacare became real. Further, it is more than just a little hypocritical that Hobby Lobby invests heavily in some of the pharmaceutical companies that produce contraceptives. Where's their righteous indignation and moral objection to that?
It would not surprise me to find out that someone put Hobby Lobby up to this episode, someone in the Republicanus/Teabagger ranks that is behind the scenes . . . the name Koch comes to mind.
And I still go back to the thought, if a Muslim closely held company/corporation decided to institute Sharia law, would the court allow it? Or would it declare that Islam is not a religion but a world conquest philosophy and decide against it?
There are so many branches to this tree that the court has guaranteed itself a heavy workload.
Well said. The Green family, like the Walton family (Wal-fart), are Koch suckers.
Thanks and kudos to all!
None of this should be a surprise when we vote for presidents that put political hacks on the Supreme Court.