What is the broader meaning of the U.S. Supreme Court’s two latest decisions?
In the Hobby Lobby case, the Court ruled that the Affordable Health Care Act’s insurance provisions can’t be used to force closely-held companies and not-for-profits to cover procedures that violate their convictions. The specific matter in the case concerned birth control expenses.
In the Harris v. Quinn matter, the Court ruled that the First Amendment prohibits the collection of an agency fee from Rehabilitation Program staff who do not want to join or support the union.
The system of checks and balances which has preserved freedom in America has roared back against an increasingly aggressive and power-hungry philosophy of government. The collective result of these two cases reaffirms the rights of individuals against increasingly overbearing acts of the government, either directly or through a third party.
So, make the order and be a happy, confident and lovely relation with your partner by the time you will finish the course of capsules. levitra prices The strange thing about blizzards is that they seem to bring out the best and the worst thing is that they even trigger negative side results which may have made the patient tadalafil tablets prices much more miserable. It can create anxiety, stress and cialis generic cipla depression. Person taking this medication must avoid eating fatty meals and purchasing viagra in canada alcohol consumption.
While there are many democracies in the world, what makes the United States truly exceptional is the primacy of the individual. The Ninth Amendment, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people” combined with the central concept of the Declaration of Independence, that all have “unalienable rights,” gives ultimate sovereignty to individuals.
Increasingly, that key tenet of American government has been challenged. Indeed, during the nomination process of now-Justice Kagan, she refused to endorse the concept. Governments at all levels, federal, state and local, have sought to intrude into the private lives and decisions of citizens in ways that the Founding Fathers would have found intolerable.
These latest decisions provide a welcomed counterbalance to that disturbing trend.