A federal judge appointed by Barack Obama has struck down religious exemptions that protected groups like the Little Sisters of the Poor from being forced to fund contraceptives, including abortifacients, in their health insurance plans, as Breitbart reports. The ruling, handed down by U.S. District Court Judge Wendy Beetlestone, dismisses two Supreme Court decisions that upheld the right of religious organizations to opt out. This decision is a direct jab at religious liberty, cloaked in bureaucratic legalese.
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania sided with New Jersey and Pennsylvania, ruling that the federal government’s religious exemptions to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate were arbitrary and capricious. These exemptions, granted during President Trump’s first term, were designed to protect religious groups from violating their deeply held beliefs. Beetlestone’s order vacates these protections entirely, leaving faith-based organizations vulnerable.
Under then-President Obama, the Department of Health and Human Services mandated that employers provide contraceptives, including some abortifacients, in their health plans. The original mandate offered no exemption for religious groups such as the Little Sisters of the Poor, a Catholic order dedicated to caring for the elderly poor. This sparked a legal battle that has spanned over a decade.
In 2016, the Supreme Court sided with the Little Sisters, affirming their right to religious exemptions. The federal government responded in 2017 under President Trump by issuing a rule that granted these exemptions. Yet, more than a dozen states, including Pennsylvania and New Jersey, immediately sued to block the rule.
The case escalated to the Supreme Court again in 2020, where the Little Sisters secured another victory. Despite this, Pennsylvania and New Jersey pressed on, arguing new angles in lower courts. Their persistence seems less about policy and more about targeting religious groups who dare to stand firm.
Judge Beetlestone, an Obama appointee, ruled that the exemptions violated the Administrative Procedure Act. She declared them “vacated in their entirety,” ignoring the Supreme Court’s clear precedent. This judicial overreach smells of progressive activism dressed up as legal reasoning.
Mark Rienzi, president of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and lead attorney for the Little Sisters, called the ruling a “blessing” of an “out-of-control effort by Pennsylvania and New Jersey to attack the Little Sisters and religious liberty.” He’s not wrong -- states pushing this agenda seem obsessed with forcing nuns to fund contraception. The culture war’s latest casualty is common sense.
Rienzi further criticized the court for dodging constitutional issues and failing to hold a hearing after five years of litigation. “It’s bad enough that the district court issued a nationwide ruling invalidating federal religious conscience rules,” he said. The judicial sidestep here is a masterclass in avoiding accountability.
Rienzi also noted the absurdity of the Little Sisters needing “yet another trip to the Supreme Court” to defend their rights. This endless litigation is a deliberate tactic to exhaust religious groups into submission. The left’s playbook: if you can’t win, just keep suing.
Mother Loraine Marie Maguire, a leader of the Little Sisters, emphasized their mission: “As Little Sisters of the Poor, we dedicate our lives to caring for the elderly poor until God calls them home.” Their work is a testament to faith in action, yet they’re dragged into courtrooms for refusing to fund drugs that violate their beliefs. It’s a perverse twist of priorities.
Mother Maguire vowed to continue the fight, saying, “We will continue to fight for the right to carry out our mission without violating our faith.” She also prayed that Pennsylvania and New Jersey would end their “needless harassment.” Good luck -- progressive states rarely tire of bullying the faithful.
The Little Sisters, backed by the Becket Fund, plan to appeal the ruling in the coming weeks. The case, Pennsylvania v. Trump, No. 17-4540, remains a flashpoint in the battle over religious freedom. Expect another round of legal sparring as this saga drags on.
This ruling isn’t just about contraceptives; it’s about whether the government can coerce religious groups to abandon their convictions. The Affordable Care Act’s mandate, as originally crafted, showed zero respect for faith-based objections. It’s a relic of an era that prioritized progressive dogma over constitutional protections.
Pennsylvania and New Jersey’s relentless pursuit of this case reveals a deeper agenda: eroding religious liberty under the guise of public health. Their arguments, untouched by prior Supreme Court rulings, are a creative but cynical attempt to sidestep precedent. It’s lawfare, plain and simple.
The Little Sisters of the Poor deserve better than being pawns in a political vendetta. This case underscores a broader truth: the left’s commitment to “choice” stops where religious freedom begins. As the appeal looms, the nation watches to see if justice will prevail or if activism will win the day.
