- Nik Nikas, Bioethics Defense Fund
On March 25, 2014, the contraceptive mandate case was argued in the U.S. Supreme Court. Hobby Lobby Stores’ owners have no moral or other objection to the use of 16 of 20 contraceptives required by the contraceptive mandate under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), but cite their deeply held religious beliefs in objecting to providing or paying for four others they see as possibly life-threatening. How will the Supreme Court rule? Does the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), allow Hobby Lobby a way around the ACA ‘s contraceptive mandate? Our experts reviewed the oral arguments and took questions from the audience in this Courthouse Steps Teleforum.
There is a split among appellate courts in the United States over medical monitoring – court-ordered payments to plaintiffs who have been exposed to some potentially harmful product or situation but have no symptoms. Is a present injury a fundamental prerequisite to any award? Should the person or entity that created the product or situation be required to pay plaintiffs for periodic medical testing? Most, but not all, courts say no. Mark Behrens discussed medical monitoring, when and where it might be required, and the latest trends.
In a variety of contexts, from the HHS preventive services mandate to same-sex marriage, differing moral visions are in increasing conflict in the public square. How will this conflict affect the American understanding of religious liberty?
The Religious Liberties Practice Group hosted this panel on "Religious Liberty & Conflicting Moral Visions" on Thursday, November 14, during the 2013 National Lawyers Convention.
Religious Liberties: Religious Liberty & Conflicting Moral Visions
12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m.