A Curious Passage from NFIB v. Sebelius

I’m reading NFIB v. Sebelius  (the Obamacare decision) in preparation for teaching the case to my constitutional law students and came across the following most interesting passage in in Justice Ginsburg’s opinion: “A mandate to purchase a particular product would be unconstitutional if, for example, the edict impermissibly abridged the freedom of speech, interfered with the free exercise of religion , or infringed on a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause.”

Has anyone cited this passage in briefs challenging the contraceptive/abortifacient mandate? Does anyone believe that Justice Ginsburg would vote to strike down the mandate when it comes before the Court?

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

Christians Are Reclaiming Marriage to Protect Children

Katy Faust

Gay marriage did not merely redefine an institution. It created child victims. After ten years, a coalition…

Save the Fox, Kill the Fetus

Carl R. Trueman

Question: Why do babies in the womb have fewer rights than vermin? Answer: Because men can buy…

The Battle of Minneapolis

Pavlos Papadopoulos

The Battle of Minneapolis is the latest flashpoint in our ongoing regime-level political conflict. It pits not…