What’s next after ruling on contraceptive services?
Executive Summary
Reproductive health advocates are moving quickly following the June 30 Supreme Court ruling that closely held corporations that assert a religious objection do not have to cover contraceptive services and methods in their employer-sponsored health plans as required under the Affordable Care Act.
• The Supreme Court decision holds that the Department of Health and Human Services’ requirement that employers cover all forms of contraception approved by the Food and Drug Administration violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.
• The Planned Parenthood Action Fund has launched a text helpline for people who are being denied coverage or need help accessing birth control in light of the court ruling. People can text "birth control" to 69866.
Reproductive health advocates are moving quickly following the June 30 Supreme Court ruling that closely held corporations that assert a religious objection do not have to cover contraceptive services and methods in their employer-sponsored health plans as required under the Affordable Care Act.
The 5-4 ruling, written by Justice Samuel Alito, was in response to two challenges to the act’s contraceptive coverage guarantee: Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, in which the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with an Oklahoma-based craft supply chain store, and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius, in which the Third Circuit ruled against a Pennsylvania-based furniture manufacturer. (Contraceptive Technology Update reported on the challenges in its Washington Watch column. See "Contraception coverage heads to Supreme Court," March 2014, p. 34.)
The Supreme Court decision holds that the Department of Health and Human Services’ requirement that employers cover all forms of contraception approved by the Food and Drug Administration violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. In Justice Alito’s majority opinion, the requirement violates "the sincerely held religious beliefs of the companies’ owners." In a dissent written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg notes, "the cost of an IUD (intrauterine device) is nearly equivalent to a month’s full-time pay for workers earning the minimum wage." While owners of Hobby Lobby "and all who share their beliefs may decline to acquire for themselves the contraceptives in question," that choice should not be imposed on employees who hold other beliefs, Ginsburg writes.
"Working for Hobby Lobby or Conestoga, in other words, should not deprive employees of the preventive care available to workers at the shop next door," Ginsburg notes. (Read the Supreme Court ruling at http://1.usa.gov/V2vRBZ.)
Advocates speak out
Women’s health advocates immediately called for action to protect contraceptive coverage following the court ruling, issuing statements on the subject.
"On behalf of the 12,000 healthcare professionals represented by ARHP [Association of Reproductive Health Professionals], I am outraged by today’s misguided ruling that treats companies like individual citizens and grants them the right to interfere in employee clinical decisions," said Wayne Shields, ARHP president and CEO. "ARHP’s position is that everyone should have access their contraceptive method of choice, based on informed decision-making, the latest science, and respect for individual autonomy."
According to Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the New York City-based Center for Reproductive Rights, the court’s ruling gives employers "the power to dictate how their employees can and cannot use their health insurance, allowing them to intrude into their employees’ private decisions based on whatever personal beliefs their employers happen to hold."
"Especially disturbing is the majority’s acceptance of the business owners’ objection to certain common forms of contraception based on the patently false characterization that they are tantamount to abortion," said Northup. "This decision gives employers license to withhold insurance benefits for safe, effective contraceptive methods, such as IUDs, based on unscientific beliefs."
Planned Parenthood Action Fund moved quickly to launch a text helpline for people who are being denied coverage or have questions about their access to birth control in light of the court ruling. By texting "birth control" to 69866 to report a denial of coverage or to obtain help accessing birth control, people will get an immediate response and receive follow-up by email or phone.
"No woman should lose access to birth control because her boss doesn’t approve of it," said Cecile Richards, president of the action fund. "We’re hearing from women across the country who are concerned and confused about what these court rulings mean for them, so we’re launching a text helpline to get people information and assistance quickly."
Stay tuned for Congress
More legal action is on the way. The two cases heard before the Supreme Court are part of more than 40 similar lawsuits that have been filed by for-profit, private companies in courts across the country.
However, Congressional action to reverse the Court’s decision was denied in July. A bill drafted by Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) and Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO) failed to obtain the necessary 60 votes to cross a procedural hurdle, while a move by Democrats to force the issue in the House was similarly shut down.1
"I urge Congress to counteract the court’s damaging decision today and to increase Title X funding while they are at it," said Clare Coleman, president and chief executive officer of National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association. "That’s the best way to support millions of families that need access to no-cost or low-cost contraceptive services to make responsible decisions for their own health and well-being."
- Pear R. Democrats push bill to reverse Supreme Court ruling on contraceptives. NY Times, July 9, 2014:A15.
