老澳门开奖结果

Tuesday, a Nebraska federal court rejected a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration鈥檚 rule requiring insurance plans to cover contraception. This was the first of two dozen challenges to be decided. We applaud the court鈥檚 decision and hope that the judges in the other cases follow the Nebraska federal judge鈥檚 lead.

As we鈥檝e explained before, these lawsuits don鈥檛 have much of a leg to stand on: Insurance covers a broad range of benefits, some of which any given individual will never use. The rule simply requires that employers and insurers treat coverage for contraception the same as other preventive medical care. It鈥檚 up to the employee 鈥� as it should be 鈥� to decide whether to access that coverage in her private life.

The Nebraska lawsuit was always especially out there. Or, as the court put it,鈥渂ased on layers of conjecture.鈥� Basically, a few attorneys general 鈥� from Nebraska, Texas, Michigan, South Carolina, Florida, Ohio, and Oklahoma 鈥� tried to elbow their way to the table. They spun an elaborate story alleging that employers in their states would drop all health care coverage if these rules go into effect (although we know that in the 28 states with contraceptive equity rules, no such thing has happened), forcing droves of new citizens on to the Medicaid rolls, thereby burdening the state government. The court properly rejected this ridiculous argument as 鈥渃onjecture,鈥� and because individuals with jobs generally don鈥檛 financially qualify for Medicaid.

You might be asking yourself, 鈥渨hen did these states became so concerned about their uninsured citizens 鈥� didn鈥檛 most of these states try to take down health care reform?鈥� Yes, ironically they did. Furthermore, three of these states 鈥� Texas, South Carolina, and Florida 鈥� are also refusing to participate in the Affordable Care Act鈥檚 , which would allow the federal government to pay the full cost of insuring their states鈥� uninsured. So much for consistency.

The court also ruled that the attorneys general did not have the right to raise religious liberty claims 鈥� those are individual, not state, rights. Indeed, it seemed odd that the attorneys general could side with a few entities that objected to providing contraception coverage, and throw all of the women in their state under the bus. But these baseless lawsuits were never about religious liberty anyway. They are part of a long series of attacks on birth control by those who want to roll back women鈥檚 rights.

Real religious freedom gives everyone the right to make personal decisions 鈥� including whether and when to use birth control 鈥� based on our own beliefs. It doesn't give one group the right to impose its beliefs on others by denying employees access to critical health services. The courts in these cases should continue to affirm that basic principal.

Learn more about contraception: Sign up for breaking news alerts, , and .