Becket Fund victory: Federal judge upholds religious liberty in Washington state
Attention, Washington, D.C.
Pay attention to Washington state.
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which has worked vigilantly to protect religious freedom across the country, prevails in a key health care case involving pharmacists and abortion pills:
A federal judge ruled on Wednesday that Washington state cannot require pharmacists to dispense emergency contraceptives if to do so violates their religious beliefs.
U.S. District Judge Ronald B. Leighton declared the state regulation unconstitutional because it trampled on pharmacists’ right to “conscientious objection.”
The ruling only applies to Washington state but is sure to reverberate nationally, as it comes in the midst of a roiling political debate about a new federal regulation mandating that all health insurance plans – even those sponsored by religious employers – provide free birth control.
Several religiously affiliated universities have sued to block that insurance regulation. Their arguments are similar to those that prevailed in the pharmacy case – namely, that the government has no right to compel individuals to violate their sincerely held religious beliefs.
Washington Governor Chris Gregoire, a Democrat who had pushed for the pharmacy mandate in an effort to ensure women’s access to contraception, had no immediate comment. A spokesman for the state pharmacy board said officials there were still studying the ruling.
The lawsuit was brought by a drugstore owner and two of his pharmacists, all of whom shared the religious conviction that emergency contraceptives are tantamount to abortion, because they can block a fertilized egg from implanting in the womb. They refused to stock or dispense the medication, often referred to by the brand name Plan B, and sued to block the regulation.
“I’m just thrilled that the court ruled to protect our constitutional right of conscience,” one of the pharmacists, Margo Thelen, said in a statement issued through her attorneys at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
More background:
The Becket Fund represents a family-owned pharmacy, Ralph’s Thriftway, and two pharmacists who could be forced out of the pharmacy profession solely because of their religious beliefs. These pharmacists cannot in good conscience dispense Plan B emergency contraception because they believe that life begins at the moment of fertilization, and that Plan B can destroy a fertilized egg.
The controversy began in 2006 when the State Board of Pharmacy unanimously supported a rule protecting conscience for pharmacy workers. The Board voted in favor of a regulation allowing pharmacists with religious objections to refrain from dispensing Plan B and to refer patients to nearby suppliers. Governor Christine Gregoire soon learned about the protection, publicly threatened to fire the Board’s members, and even called them late at night to lobby them. She replaced several Board members, publicly threatened to remove others, and personally joined in a boycott of the family-owned pharmacy. Matters escalated when the State’s Human Rights Commission insinuated that Board members could be held personally liable under gender discrimination laws if they supported the regulation.
Buckling under these pressures, the Board decided to reconsider the issue and instead adopted a regulation requiring pharmacies to stock and dispense the medication even when doing so violates their conscience. The Board adopted this regulation even though it admitted it found no evidence that anyone in the state had ever been unable to obtain Plan B (or any other time-sensitive medication) due to religious objections.
The Becket Fund’s clients then filed suit to prevent the new regulation from forcing them out of their profession. They argued that forcing pharmacists to dispense Plan B in violation of their religious beliefs violated their Constitutional right to the free exercise of religion.
On February 22, 2012, Judge Leighton, struck down the law requiring pharmacies to dispense the drug.
The opinion, findings, and permanent injunction documents can be found here.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
GOP Texas primary fight: Desperate Dewhurst slimes conservative challenger Ted Cruz
May 25, 2012 07:31 PM by Michelle Malkin
8 CommentsWho’s funding Brett Kimberlin?
May 25, 2012 01:52 PM by Michelle Malkin
28 CommentsObama’s Land of the LOST
May 25, 2012 01:42 PM by Michelle Malkin
55 CommentsObama’s latest campaign angle: I’ve been saving America from wild Republican debts
May 24, 2012 04:33 PM by Doug Powers
55 Comments
Senate finally passes a budget approves bill striking word ‘lunatic’ from federal law
May 24, 2012 11:22 AM by Doug Powers
193 CommentsStammertime: Jay Carney asked if Chicago protests have soured Obama’s support for OWS
May 23, 2012 07:44 PM by Doug Powers
54 Comments
S.E. Cupp, Hustler, and the four stages of conservative female abuse
May 23, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
142 CommentsPig Maher’s boy Bill Burton mocks my support of Hatch challenger Dan Liljenquist
May 23, 2012 11:37 AM by Michelle Malkin
32 CommentsFree speech blogburst: Show solidarity for targeted conservative bloggers; Update: It’s Everybody Blog About Brett Kimberlin Day; Donation fund for targets
May 23, 2012 05:59 AM by Michelle Malkin
114 Comments
Categories: Abortion,Health care,Politics
JustOneMinute
» Patterico And The Brett Kimberlin GangBabalu Blog
» U.S. Manned Space Flight in The 21st CenturyVillainous Company
» Must Read Post of the Day. Possibly, the Year
I saw this earlier today and was happy to see that the Constituition was upheld today.
Hopefully this will help to set a precedent for the legal challenges to the DHS mandate.
The states have to take back the power which they allowed DC to take from them in exchange for returning stolen tax money. No matter who is in the WH and Congress, the states have to change the influence DC has over them. The Constitution did not grant the federal gov the power to infiltrate and conquer the states. It is time for the people and the states to say NO to big gov DC in every way necessary.
In this case it was the state of Washington that was trampling on the Constitution. The state had passed a law requiring all pharmacies to sell the “morning after pill” regardless of their religious beliefs. So a pharamcy and two pharamcists, with the help of the Beckett Fund, sued the state of Washington in Federal court for trampling on their Constitutional right to religious freedom.
Great news! May other states follow with suit for other companies who have a religious issue with being forced to do things they are against. One tiny step at a time?
L
In Obamaville the first thing that want you to turn in is your conscience.
How long before the Ninth Circus strikes HIM down?
Question for the leftists who support abortion:
If a fetus is just an unviable tissue mass, why bother taking RU-486?
Wouldn’t an unviable tissue mass just be expelled like other waste?
That’s one small step, a lot of steps to go.
Can’t wait to see how the Islamists twist this to force more Sharia on the USA.
What time is it?
You can count on certain parties working on that as we write.
This isn’t really a religious issue as the left wants to define it. It is a matter of telling a business what it must stock on its shelves and sell. They are free to sell or not sell whatever they see fit for whatever reason. They are not required to explain their reasons. It is like demamding every food store sell Pepsi or 7-up. It is their decision wheather it is a good business decision or not, not some appointed state board trying to force an agenda.
I hope Patty Murray is screaming mad over this ruling.
Well that all depends on if her staff can explain it to her.
Republicanvet #7 – Don’t try to get all logical with leftist libtards (redundancy alert!) They will ignore the simple truth and return to their talking points. If they gave the truth any consideration their heads would explode.
Don’cha just wish it could be so?
thank goodness, a small step in the proper direction. we are on a long journey now
I’m waiting for the leftist to get up-in-arms about this “extremist” pharmacy.
The Sovereignity of the States needs to smack down all this Fed nitpicking.
They already have been. I don’t live too far from that Pharamacy (it is in Olympia, WA). They have had protesters and boycotts against them already (which lead to Conservatives in the area to support them by shopping there).
This is great news, for now, until some lib activist judge can jump in and force pharmacies to do otherwise. I hope Nasty Pelousy’s head exploded when she found out.
It’s happening, maybe later in my lifetime.
The result will be three countries: one will consist of the West Coast states and Hawaii, another will be the Northeast and Rust Belt, and the third will be the current “Fly-over States”, also known as Red States.
Haha – exactly my thoughts.
I’m going with “The Nine Nations of North America” , a book written in 1981 by Joel Garreau, in which he suggests that a future North America could be divided into nine regions, or “nations”, which have distinctive economic and cultural features.
Of course, at that time he didn’t foresee the influx of muslim hordes int the USA, so the revised vision would be 10 nations, as part of the upper midwest, i.e. Michigan and Minnesota would consolidate into Michiminnestan.
Somebody here suggested about two months ago that we divide the country in half – give the Progs their choice of which half they want, and in twenty years they’ll be coming to us for jobs and food. I believe it.
I’m a little partial to the western half myself…
Well, that would be sorta like popping a helium filled balloon. A brief moment of sound and fury but signifying nothing.
Well, the conservative half would have to have the border sealed with restrictive entry points and very strict immigration rules. Just look what open borders did to the previously somewhat conservative states next to states such as New York, Massachusetts and California.
We could have used the stimulous money to move people to one side or the other and we would have gotten a more bang for the buck that way.
The only nice thing I can say about Nancy Pelosi…..
….she can drink a Slurpee without ever getting a headache.
Not quite. I assure you the area east of the Cascades would join the red states. In fact most of the rural and small towns on the west coast would join the red states.
Hmmmm…..
Religious Liberty?
I’ve never been able to understand how you folks can yammer on about religious freedom – then attack Obama’s religion.
Santorm said Obama practices a phony theology.
How can anyone who supports religious liberty attack another person’s religion?
Ultimately the government can just get out of the way.
If a Christian pharmacy refuses to supply the drug, as is their right, the customer can go elsewhere to spend their money, as is their right, and get it from a secular pharmacy who does dispense it, as is their right.
Freedom works for all, no government necessary. Try explaining this to a politician though.
This same example can be used the disprove the need for almost any business regulation. The customers demand what the market will provide. In the above example if more customers stopped using the Christian pharmacy because of it’s values than who specifically sought it out because of it’s values, the community would be democratically voting with their wallets on what type of pharmacy they wish to be successful in their town.
The free market is the ultimate democracy, but politicians too entranced with their own power like to think they know better.
Governor Christine Gregoire, like Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, is another faux “Catholic” obviously more dedicated to the culture of death than to the Living God.
Her crude bullying of the pharmacists and the board members was despicable, especially considering her profession of faith.
On February 23, 2012 at 12:08 pm, hawkeye54 said:
More like a popcorn fart.
Natural boundaries are necessary. We can’t have isolated “red” colonies, though.
On February 23, 2012 at 12:08 pm, AlohaGuy said:
You underestimate the destructive ability of the left.
I would give it 2 years max.
Governor Christine Gregoire, stole Washington’s Governorship, naturally to no one’s surprise the state has drifted further in the cesspool of liberalism and it stinks.
Niet, no, this not possible. Pay no attention this running dog capitalist lackey judge. All must obey immediately without delay decree of all beloved commissar bureaucratica apparachik comrades.
Also in news, all children must get State and parental permission before in tanning bed lie. Abortion or use abortifacient drug permission not necessary. That is all comrades. Stay alert for next State transmission instruction.
Right down to the fact that she will try to use the courts to ram her and the D’s agenda down our throat. Just look at how she filed a lawsuit to overturn the 2/3 majority to raise taxes intitaitive. The same initative that has overwhlemingly passed everytime it has been put on the ballot.
It took several iterations, as in Minnesota with Franken, but once the count fell to her favor the vote was quickly sealed and certified. Ain’t “democracy” grand?
And even in the lawsuit the court found that there were nearly 2000 illegal votes cast. The judge said he could do nothing, because they could not tell who the illegal votes were for. So the only way for him to overturn the elction (He refused to call for a new election which Rossi had asked for)was for Rossi to find out who voted illegally and compell them to say who they voted for (which would violate the 5th ammendment as you cannot compel someone to incriminate themselves).
Another note, the same team that helped Gregoire win in 2004 was the same team that helped Frnaken win….
She’d make an old Soviet proud.
Gregoire and DWS should be cellmates.
The most amazing part in all of this:
The phamacists were able to find a lawyer in WA that would fight for their religious freedom. I thought only former ACLU, or EPA lawyers could practice in WA.
Believe it or not we have some pretty darn good Conservative lawyers here in WA ST with a pretty good record of wins. This case, the case of teahers vs unions of political spending of their dues, I am pretty sure even citizens united was partly from here in WA ST.
They are only this good, because of all the practive they get
Hangfire:
I think the “West Coast States” will be more like “a strip of land 50 miles wide (if that) along the West Coast”, if the inhabitants have anything to say in the matter. The rest of the states would join Flyover Country (AKA The Real America).
States like Michigan, Illinois, and Ohio will claim to be “Red,” but will not be able to join unless they kick out the Liberal cities (Chicago, Toledo, Cleveland, etc.)
The Prius will be banned, because you can’t fit a gun-rack inside it.
Am I the only one who thought of Demolition Man when Taco Bell won all the restaurant franchises?
Taco Bell? Isn’t that the Mexican phone company?
Yeah I heard that. They have probably written a Poli Sci textbook for all the Lib universities to pick up. Suggested title The Democracy Problem: Techniques For Circumventing The Constitution and Due Process.
Like many in the pro-abort camp, they just need to tell her that the pro-lifers are trying to take away abortion and contraceptives. Not true, but when have fallacies and lies stopped the left from protesting?
It’s a sad commentary on our nation that we even have to be on this journey.
I told you my dad was heavily involved with Magnussen and Jackson back in the day. Would those guys have behaved this way? I hope not. I think the Dems of that era were very socially conservative. They may have countenanced the electoral shenanigans though. Who knows.
I’m thankful for organizations like The Becket Fund and ACLJ doing God’s work.
Ironic. If it plays out like they want, Murray, Gregoire and friends will abort and biologically choke themselves into extinction. Maybe Darwin was onto something.
Which reminds me of the scene from Blazzing Saddles when The Gov’s (Mel Brooks) secretary reads the telegraph about the problems in Rock Ridge. Which the Gov replies we have to do somehting to protect are phony baloney jobs (followed by a chours of hurumpfs fromt he cabinet).
Why do you think the schools are so important to the left. They need them so they can brainwash our children into good little liberals.
Maybe we could designate an Area 51 no-go “Liberal Zone”. They could be their own countries and have their own embassies and get foreign aid from Russia and China just like Cuba does. But Cuba had to start begging from Venezuela and Argentina when the Russians cut them off.
No, on second thought they’d just invite them to stage ICBMs there.
“By their deeds ye shall know them.” Forgotten where I read those words, or something like them, but how true they are.
Someone else commented on here about others commenting on someone else’s religion. In Obama’s case, it is merely stating the obvious and what he himself has said in his own words as well as examining his actions as opposed to what may reside in his heart. That is quite different than trying to deny them the free expression of their religion and conscious.
This decision is THE reason why I’m having a good day!
This is a delicate issue, if this is established as a precedent it could result in turmoil in many other areas.
Could a Muslim cashier at the Safeway refuse to handle pork at checkout because of their religious beliefs? In fact, there was a case about this exact issue not too long ago.
Listen, the assault on religious freedom did not begin yesteday. There was Government banning animal sacrifice, multiple marriage, slavery and peyote.
The answer might be to go to a different pharmacy and a different Safeway.
I would not want you to violate your Religious beliefs and I would not want your Religious beliefs to prevent me from having barbequed pork spareribs.
zyzzyg: If I were Muslim then I wouldn’t be working at Safeway since I would need to handle pork.
You answered your question. Go to a different pharmacy and a different Safeway.
Context, ilovetodropcommentsandrun… CONTEXT. Santorum was not referring to Obama’s religion (which he concedes is Christianity of Obama says it is), but of Obama’s adherence to Green Theology.
They’re trying just that in Georgia.
Do we tell Obummer or anyone else that they CAN’T practice their faith? No.
Now go upstairs. Your mom is calling you to dinner.
Gee, I thought the issue was the store owner setting their own policy according to their own faith. Last I checked there are halal meat stores that DON’T SELL PORK! This is the same as that. Not what you said.
The issues are different becuase of one thing and one thing only. The Muslim lady in question was not the store owner; therefore she could not set store policy. She new what the policy was when she was hired and no one forced her to work there.
In the case of the Pharamacy, it was the store owner who set the store policy which both pharamacists agreed with (they all share the same religious beliefs). This policy had be in place for some time and it was the state government who came in and tried to change a store policy.
Did you read what MM posted?
” . . . two of his pharmacists, all of whom shared the religious conviction . . . “
The cashier at the Safeway is an employee, just as the Phamarcists who are employees.
I would not expect a halal store to sell pork.
I do expect that I could go to a Safeway and buy pork spareribs. I do not expect that an employee at Safeway would not ring up my pork spareribs.
Were a Safeway employee not willing to touch the spareribs and not ring them up, I would go to a different Safeway.
I would not expect a Christian Pharmacist to sell contraceptives.
Were a Pharmacist employee not willing to touch and not ring up contraceptives, I would go to a different Pharmacist.
Would you go to a halal store to buy pork? No.
Would you go to a Christian Pharmacist to buy contraceptives? No.
OK.
Should a Muslim be forced to handle pork?
Should a Christian be forced to handle contraceptives?
Please, be consistent in your response.
Please compare apples to apples.
In the case of the muslim woman, no one forced her to work in a store that did not hold the same religious beliefs as she did.
In the case of the pharmacists, they chose to work in a store where the policies of the store were consistent with their beliefs.
Small point – never said the cashier was a female.
It is an assumption not in evidence that the store policy was explained to the cashier, or that the cashier explained that they would not touch pork. I am not going down the rabbit hole of discussing religious beliefs at a job interview.
And, that is ther rub, with wich I have trouble with. As I have said in my original post, “I would not want you to violate your Religious beliefs and I would not want your Religious beliefs to prevent me from having barbequed pork spareribs.”
There is a better solution and Government intrusion into the issue is not the answer.
I did, because I am familiar with the story and happen to know that it was a female.
If you do not know what Safeway sells then what the hell are you even doing applying for the job? For that matter why would Safeway hire someone who does not know what the store does?
We could play this game all day, but bottom line is the situations are different even if for no other fact that one of the plantiffs in the pharmacy case was the store owner and has a right to decide what products or services is sold in his store as long as the products are legal. A store employee (such as the muslim who did not want to handle pork) does not have the right to set store policy (no employee does only the owner).
The apples to apples are that the Government is intruding where they should not. The Government seeks to compell the Pharmacist, and would also seek to compell the muslim cashier to touch pork.
Small point – I did not say the cashier was a female.
At what point did the store or the cahier share their religious beliefs? Like it or not religion is not an interview question. Maybe it should be.
Should a potential employee be asked whether they believe it is deeds, or words, that will grant them entry to heaven? Christians of one stripe believe the former, Christians of different strip belive the latter.
Christians of one stripe believe the body of Christ should not be on a cross, Christians of a different stripe believe it is OK for the body of Christ to be on a cross.
Are you going to make a hiring decision based on theocratic differences?
Did not get that bit of information from the story. Was religion discussed at the interview? Who asked who about personal religious beliefs? Would you like to be asked about your religious beliefs in a job interview? Would you volunteer your religious beliefs in a job interview?
Were the pork issue to come up at a Safeway somewhere, that would be an easy one to solve: The management at the Safeway could have a no-pork cash register.
The answer is the guy doesn’t have to work at the Safeway and sell pork. No one is making the guy work at Safeway.
The state is making, did make, or will make the pharmacists sell the contraception. I guess your saying that he would need to move out of the state. In that case your correct.
Z, the woman knows that they sell pork at Safeway, don’t become a cashier at Safeway. She could be moved to another area of the store. I’ve now read ChapBix’s comment. Good point.
Now if only one can sue to have the governor, who abused her power, kicked out of office.
At least sue her for civil rights violations under 18 USC 1983.
So you agree that the state of Washington should get off this pharmacy’s back and let them refuse to sell contraceptives if they don’t want to sell contraceptives, right?
Obastard: “Rights?? Rights?? You don’t need no stinkin’ rights!?!”
Isn’t the State of Washington in the 9th “Circus”? If it is then that Judge’s decision will be quickly overturned by the 9th “Circus’s” Appeals Judges. Until the Supreme Court takes this issue there will never be an end to these attacks on our 1st Amendment rights.
Quoting myself “. . . Government intrusion into the issue is not the answer.”
Yes, it is reasonable to conclude from what I said that Washington State should get off the pharmacy’s back. Also, the State should not get on the back of the cashier either.
One more thing, quoting myself yet again, ” . . . I would not want you to violate your Religious beliefs and I would not want your Religious beliefs to prevent me from having barbequed pork spareribs.”
Do you agree?
Was anyone here suggesting any kind of disagreement with that position? Otherwise I’m not sure why you brought it up.
As long as the state doesn’t get involved, I’m not all that concerned with what people choose not to sell, or with what legal products owners of businesses choose to require their employees to sell. I’ll patronize the places that sell me what I wish to buy.