- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 81,994
- Reaction score
- 87,058
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
"Jonathan Mitchell is at it again. Mitchell is the conservative lawyer behind S.B. 8, the Texas law that ended most abortions in the state in 2021, even before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Now, Mitchell is going after the Affordable Care Act’s requirement that private employers’ insurance policies cover preventive medical services. In a case brought by Mitchell, a federal judge on Wednesday ruled that a Texas company can’t be forced to provide coverage for drugs that prevent HIV infection because its Christian owner says such medication “facilitates and encourages homosexual behavior” in violation of his religious beliefs.
... it’s fair to have some doubts about O’Connor’s determination that Braidwood Management, the company complaining about having to cover the HIV-prevention drugs, had shown the necessary harm to bring the case. ...the Biden Justice Department noted in urging O’Connor to dismiss the case, Braidwood didn’t claim it was being asked to cover the medication — just that there was a “hypothetical possibility that it may one day have to make” such a payment. As the department’s brief said, “It is difficult to imagine that individuals eligible to be prescribed PrEP medications would choose to work for Braidwood,” given the company’s anti-gay stance. This is not the stuff on which strong federal cases are made.
...Here, the opposition is not to the medicine itself — the drugs can be used, for example, to allow a woman who is HIV-positive to become pregnant without risk to her child. It’s to the sort of people who tend to take the medication, and the behavior they engage in."
Link
Setting aside for a moment the utter cruelty of the decision, conservative courts seem to be setting up an unjust legal double standard where one group can discriminate against others but others can't discriminate against them.
... it’s fair to have some doubts about O’Connor’s determination that Braidwood Management, the company complaining about having to cover the HIV-prevention drugs, had shown the necessary harm to bring the case. ...the Biden Justice Department noted in urging O’Connor to dismiss the case, Braidwood didn’t claim it was being asked to cover the medication — just that there was a “hypothetical possibility that it may one day have to make” such a payment. As the department’s brief said, “It is difficult to imagine that individuals eligible to be prescribed PrEP medications would choose to work for Braidwood,” given the company’s anti-gay stance. This is not the stuff on which strong federal cases are made.
...Here, the opposition is not to the medicine itself — the drugs can be used, for example, to allow a woman who is HIV-positive to become pregnant without risk to her child. It’s to the sort of people who tend to take the medication, and the behavior they engage in."
Link
Setting aside for a moment the utter cruelty of the decision, conservative courts seem to be setting up an unjust legal double standard where one group can discriminate against others but others can't discriminate against them.
