Last night, The Daily Show took this confusion and controversy head on with a montage of Fox News clips talking about blowing Obamacare and a dismembered head… which some might argue are pretty much the same thing.
Our friends over at American Bridge had a tracker on Chris Christie this week and what do you know…. when asked if he supported the Hobby Lobby decision made by the U.S. Supreme Court that put a corporation’s religion over individual liberties the New Jersey Governor gave a Republican Iowa Caucus answer:
Yesterday a story about a blog post from a federal judge in Nebraska appointed by George H. W. Bush went viral. Understandably so. The judge literally told the Supreme Court to shut the f*ck up:
“Next term is the time for the Supreme Court to go quiescent–this term and several past terms have proven that the Court is now causing more harm (division) to our democracy than good by deciding hot button cases that the Court has the power to avoid. As the kids say, it is time for the Court to stfu”.
That’s kind of kickass on it’s own. A federal judge appointed by a Republican president tells the five dudes on the Supreme Court that not only was their decision stupid but they should really stop embarrassing the bench.
I loved the story. It was great. It went viral. Awesome sauce. Here’s what struck me, though: this federal judge has a blog. Seriously!
What you may not know is that one of the most highly-trafficked legal websites that doesn’t provide case law research is SCOTUSBlog.com. It’s where EVERYONE goes – and where everyone went last week while waiting for the decisions to be handed down from the bench on these cases. But SCOTUSBlog can’t get a seat in the press box for the Supreme Court because the US Senate Daily Press Gallery doesn’t consider them journalists. All appeals by these smart folks were denied. No offense to the Press Gallery, but I’m fairly certain that among the more than 50,000 people on SCOTUSBlog waiting for decisions were journalists who needed someone to explain to them what these rulings meant.
By that same token, how is it that a federal judge in Nebraska is more transparent than the highest court in the land? How is it that we as a country are constantly up in arms about government transparency when we require it for our state and federal leaders, but we don’t for our courts?
There have been several arguments against transparency (specifically cameras in the courts) from the Justices themselves. They believe it would undermine the court, it would diminish the authority somehow, or it would create a spectacle.
During the confirmation hearing of Justice Sonia Sotomayor 2009, she was asked if she was open to the idea of cameras in the Supreme Court. “I have had positive experiences with cameras,” she said. “When I have been asked to join experiments of using cameras in the courtroom, I have participated. I have volunteered.” But later, Justice Sotomayor flip-flopped.
Here’s the thing: The court has kind of already made a spectacle of itself. There are so many allegations of improper behavior from this court. There are questionable ethics, lack of recusals when there should be, conflicts of interest, even racism.
If they’re not going to be on TV, if they won’t let SCOTUSBlog.com in to report, fine. At least there’s one judge taking to the internet.
On Thursday, even as their horrible Hobby Lobby decision continued to send shockwaves around the nation, the Supreme Court actually made things worse. It issued a short, unsigned opinion that says Wheaton College, a small Christian college in Illinois, doesn’t have to provide birth control coverage to female students if they don’t want to – and they don’t even have to fill out a religious-exemption form so someone else could provide it. Because apparently filling out paperwork saying, “We’re not going to pay for this, but someone else can,” was for Wheaton College the same thing as committing an abortion themselves.
In a blistering dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the ruling contradicts what the conservative majority said in the Hobby Lobby case just a few days ago – that a way to fix the religious opt-out would be to have the government pay for the contraceptives, and that the Hobby Lobby decision was narrow:
“Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe they can take us at our word. Not so today. After expressly relying on the availability of the religious-nonprofit accommodation to hold that the contraceptive coverage requirement violates [the Religious Freedom Restoration Act] as applied to closely held for-profit corporations, the Court now, as the dissent in Hobby Lobby feared it might, retreats from that position,” Justice Sotomayor said.
We here at BNR have spent most of the week telling you about why this ruling is bad, how it hurts women, how it makes a decision based on a belief and not science. We’ve told you about the companies now saying that want to be allowed to discriminate against LGBT workers because they don’t believe they should have to abide by equal protection. In the end, we as women must understand that this country’s institutions no longer prioritize our individual rights over the rights of a corporation. If you have not incorporated yourself, I urge you to do so quickly.
To every church or religious person everywhere: Just because you believe something is true does not make it true. I’m sorry to break this to you, but your faith doesn’t trump facts. If you firmly believe that the Earth is flat, it doesn’t mean the Earth is flat and that NASA is part of a government conspiracy. Yet Hobby Lobby believes that certain kinds of birth control cause abortions, and the Supreme Court agreed, even though it’s not true. The Plan B pill, intrauterine devices (IUDs) and other forms of contraception Hobby Lobby can now ban, in fact, don’t cause abortions. The science is irrefutable. Doctors, pharmacists and other experts agree. And no religious belief can ever change it.
Here is the real science behind Plan B, IUDs, and similar types of birth controls that do not abort anything.
If a corporation wants to oppose birth control because it prevents pregnancy, that’s an entirely different issue. If that’s the case, then Hobby Lobby should not pay for male employees to have vasectomies – which they currently do. But again: it should never trump someone else’s personal liberty. Or the facts.
After Monday’s ruling by five white men who don’t like women’s access to birth control, one place we can turn to for solace is our comedians. Thankfully, we here at BNR have Lizz Winstead, who recalls a bygone era when people were people and corporations were corporations. And then there’s a prophetic Stephen Colbert, who in 2011 told us Obamacare must be repealed so the country can “go back to the way things were – when [health] insurance only had to cover boner pills.”
Once again, John Oliver nailed it on Sunday night. He had some choice words for Hobby Lobby before Monday’s Supreme Court ruling and the idea that a corporation can have religious beliefs. This is all you need to know:
“If you really want to be treated like a person, Corporations, then guess what? Paying for things you don’t like is what it feels like to be one. If corporations want to be people, they should have to take the rough with the smooth. Corporations should have the lifespan of a person. 79 years – 75 if they’re based in Mississippi. Oh and female companies, you only get to make 83 cents on the dollar. Sorry Wendy! I guess it’s just that Burger King must have worked harder!”
He’s making a great joke, of course, but he’s on to something. As Lizz Winstead points out “Remember when people used to be people? #Nostalgia.” Boy… those were the good old days, huh? When do you suppose we can become a corporation so we can have more rights?