Even Obama's 'Compromise' Is Unconstitutional, Critics Say

By Craig Bannister | February 10, 2012 | 4:21pm EST

Even Pres. Obama’s alleged “compromise” on his contraception mandate is unconstitutional, a House Republican leader and the chairman of a public policy research center said today.

Republican Study Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) says Obama’s revised version of an ObamaCare mandate still violates the Constitution:

“This ObamaCare rule still tramples on Americans’ First Amendment right to freedom of religion. It’s a fig leaf, not a compromise. Whether they are affiliated with a church or not, employers will still be forced to pay an insurance company for coverage that includes abortion-inducing drugs.”

“This is not just a problem for church-affiliated hospitals and charities. Under these rules, a small business owner with religious objections to abortion-inducing drugs and contraception must either violate his religious beliefs or violate the law.”

“The liberal Obama administration thinks its political goals trump the religious faith of American citizens. That isn’t right, fair, or constitutional.”

Amy Ridenour, chairman of the National Center for Public Policy Research, agrees:

“Isn't the compromise just a big spin and an insult to churches, because it implies that they just want an 'out' to permit them to pretend that they aren't providing coverage they believe is immoral?

The HHS mandate is an unconstitutional infringement of the First Amendment. The compromise is, too.

President Obama noted in his announcement that 'we live in a pluralistic society.'  Too bad 'pluralism' to him means my way or the highway."

U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell also released a statement which, without explicitly calling the revised regulation unconstitutional, suggests that Obama isn't sorry that he had violated the Constitution - he's just sorry that he got caught:

“While the White House is trying to walk away from its original mandate, one thing this debate has made perfectly clear is that the administration believes the Constitution takes a back seat to its ideological goals.  They’re not sorry they violated the First Amendment, they’re sorry Americans didn’t agree with them when they did.

“The administration promised during debate on the health care law that constitutional rights would not be infringed and that costs would go down; we now know that’s not true. So it’s understandable that affected institutions still have serious questions and concerns about this latest promise from the White House. Remember, this isn’t about accounting—it’s about the freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

“This whole episode demonstrates why politicians should not be the ones to make determinations about religious beliefs and is just another reason why the deeply flawed health law needs to be repealed. Whether it is forcing people to buy government-chosen health insurance, or injecting Washington’s oversight into nearly every aspect of people’s lives, the Obama administration clearly believes that the Constitution is an inconvenience, not a guiding principle, in their implementation of the health law.

“The only good news to come out of this is that Americans have shown once again that they are willing to fight back against a government that attempts to infringe on their constitutional rights.”

See more "Right Views, Right Now"

MRC Store