Tue. Aug 5th, 2025

2013 a Bad Year for Obamacare Abortion-Pill Mandate

President Barack Obama

2013 proved to be a bad year for the Obama administration’s abortion-pill mandate, which finished the year with 88 percent of court decisions going against it (53-7). Alliance Defending Freedom and its allied attorneys are currently winning their cases by a wide margin, with court orders going 15-1 against the mandate.

Courts issued a flurry of orders against the mandate even in the waning days of the year, including orders in Alliance Defending Freedom cases filed on behalf of nonprofit Christian colleges and universities in California, Indiana, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania. The score in favor of nonprofit religious entities is 18-1; the score in favor of families doing business is 35-6.

“Unjust laws are not valid laws. In light of all the legal victories against the mandate, the wisest course is for the administration to stop wasting taxpayer resources on these cases and end its attacks on the First Amendment,” said Senior Counsel David Cortman.

“Many people have noted the administration’s failures and scandals over the past year, particularly with regard to Obamacare and government overreach,” added Senior Legal Counsel Matt Bowman, “but little illustrates that more concretely than the loss record on the abortion pill mandate.”

The mandate forces employers, regardless of their religious or moral convictions, to provide insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception under threat of heavy financial penalties if the mandate’s requirements aren’t met.

Most of the orders issued against the mandate so far have come in the form of preliminary injunctions, court orders that prohibit the Obama administration from applying its mandate against the party that filed suit while the case moves forward. Preliminary injunctions are difficult to obtain because a court will only issue one if it is convinced that the party requesting the injunction is likely to win the case.

The U.S. Supreme Court has the opportunity to settle many of the mandate’s legal flaws soon. In November, the high court agreed to review the Alliance Defending Freedom case Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius, a Pennsylvania Mennonite family’s lawsuit against the mandate, and the Becket Fund case Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius, a challenge filed by the owners of the national craft store chain.

By

Leave a Reply

By submitting your comment, you agree to receive occasional emails from [email protected], and its authors, including insights, exclusive content, and special offers. You can unsubscribe at any time. (U.S. residents only.)

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Podcasts

More News
John Bevere Exposes the Silent Threat Facing the Modern Church
John Bevere Exposes the Silent Threat Facing the Modern Church
A Christian Guide to the 7 Deadly Sins
A Christian Guide to the 7 Deadly Sins
How Genesis and Revelation Connect: the Beginning and the End
How Genesis and Revelation Connect: the Beginning and the End
Have You Committed the Unpardonable Sin? The Truth from Scripture
Have You Committed the Unpardonable Sin? The Truth from Scripture
10 Steps to Honor God and Be Less Contentious
10 Steps to Honor God and Be Less Contentious
Deliverance Is a Decision Part Two: Jesus Healing on Shabbat
Deliverance Is a Decision Part Two: Jesus Healing on Shabbat
Demons In Hell
Demons In Hell
The End of the 10 Kings
The End of the 10 Kings
Deliverance Is a Decision Part One: Jesus Healing on Shabbat
Deliverance Is a Decision Part One: Jesus Healing on Shabbat
Mocking God Brings Destruction
Mocking God Brings Destruction
previous arrow
next arrow
Shadow

Latest Videos
113K Subscribers
1.3K Videos
12.6M Views

Copy link