Religious and moral objectives have been used by the Republicans. This especially started happening ever since the President of the United States, Donald Trump, mixed healthcare issues with religious beliefs. However, that is what the court does not think of the present Obamacare policy, and has thus, once again considered looking into the issue.
The Christmas gift given by the court to Donald Trump, with regard to the scrapping of Obamacare has been taken back from the Trump Administration. The US federal judge has blocked administrative regulations on birth control from being applied across the entire country, after new rules triggered protests.
The rules allow employers and insurers to decline birth control if doing so violates their “religious beliefs” or “moral convictions”. The new rules were to come into force all throughout the nation, on Monday, but the implementation has been stopped for now.
However, the judge in Philadelphia granted an injunction requested by attorney generals in Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
Judge Wendy Beetlestone declared that the new framework would make it tough for many women to obtain free contraception and would be an undue burden on US states. Her decision follows the same judgement given by a judge in California. However, that verdict was applicable for only 13 states and Washington DC.
The diplomacy with regards to healthcare can be really dangerous, and any government that strides to enforce any law must foresee the real benefits, before actually implementing the policy.
Earlier this year, the Republican officials in 20 states, led by Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxton, argued in a lawsuit that the Obamacare requirement for people to have health insurance is unconstitutional., Further, they even claimed that the is law is equally unconstitutional, but the grounds on which the claims were made are, still unclear.
The case is especially when, fifty-five million women benefited from the original Obama-era rule, which made companies provide free birth control.
Trump’s re-election in 2020 also walks by the line with the implementation of the rule, and is expected to act as one of the major agendas for the Republicans.
California attorney general Xavier Becerra said in a statement: “It’s 2019, yet the Trump administration is still trying to roll back women’s rights. He added, “The law couldn’t be clearer – employers have no business interfering in women’s healthcare decisions.”
However, the US Department of Justice argued in court documents and emphasized that the new rules defend “a narrow class of sincere religious and moral objectors” and stopped them from conducting practices “that conflict with their beliefs”.
On a larger perspective, the situation is chaotic, but the bottom line is earsplitting clear, and points out to how healthcare and religious objectives must not co-exist. Especially, when the primary concern is moving ahead, and not going back in time.
Correspondingly, the new judgements also state or rather plausibly presents that even the court understands that a fine line should be maintained between the two topics, and the President’s administration has failed to do so.
Show Comments (0)