Ninth Circuit blocks Trump administration contraception exceptions

closeVideoFox News Flash top headlines for Oct. 23

Fox News Flash top headlines for Oct. 23 are here. Check out what you click on

A Federal court on Tuesday blocked new rules that the employer includes the Trump administration, which would have allowed, with religious or moral objections to opt-out of Obamacare’s requirement that birth control coverage in employee health insurance.

Two of the three judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit concluded that a birth-control exemption against the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate, which requires all employers to support the birth control coverage with no co-payment.


The health and Human Services Department, Department of labor and Treasury Department in the year 2017, started allowed the adoption of new rules that the religious groups including the Little sisters of the poor, out of the need for birth control coverage for employees, the “National Review” reported. The rules were completed in the year 2018, but not yet been enforced.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra led a lawsuit with 13 other States, the rules against the religious exemption.

“It’s a simple concept: a woman and her doctor are qualified to be the only people to decide what’s best for your health. Today will serve as a reminder to not disturb the trump administration, the politicians and the employers have certainly no business women’s reproductive health,” said Becerra in a statement, according to the Washington Times.

Tuesday is reported to have the decision blocked the new rules in force in California, Delaware, Virginia, Maryland, New York, Illinois, Washington, Minnesota, Connecticut, North Carolina, Vermont, Rhode Island, Hawaii, and the District of Columbia, Bloomberg Law News.

Judge J. Clifford Wallace, who was nominated by President Nixon, wrote in the majority decision that “the religious exemption is contrary to congressional intent that all women have access to adequate pension provision, and the exemption operates in a manner completely at odds with the careful, individual, and review on behalf of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act”.


Judge Andrew J. Kleinfeld, who was nominated by President George H. W. Bush, dissented, writing that the 14-state lawsuit was brought before a court, in an effort to save States money, not the protection of women’s reproductive rights. He also wrote that a decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the third Circuit, which provides the implementation of the Trump administration blocked the rules, nationwide, in this case is irrelevant.

“The casual reader can imagine that the dispute over the provision of contraception and abortion services for women. It is not so.” Kleinfeld wrote. “No woman sued for a preliminary injunction have been issued in this case, and no explanations of women, the establishment of a question in this case is about whether they will be taken reproductive benefits, or damaged by the change in the regulation. In this case, a claim by several States to prevent an amendment to the regulation enters into force, to demand, that it cost you money.”

Follow us

Don't be shy, get in touch. We love meeting interesting people and making new friends.

Most popular