ACLJ Files Brief Urging Supreme Court To Reject Obamacare HHS Mandate On Religious Grounds

Jan 28, 2014, 13:45 ET from American Center for Law and Justice

WASHINGTON, Jan. 28, 2014 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), a pro-life legal organization that focuses on constitutional law, today filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to reject the ObamaCare HHS Mandate because it violates federal law and the U.S Constitution – putting religious civil liberties at risk. The amicus brief, filed on behalf of several businesses and owners challenging the mandate as well as more than 90,000 Americans, supports the arguments opposing the Mandate in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood v. Sebelius – two cases now before the high court.

"In order to protect the religious freedom of Americans, the Supreme Court must declare this mandate unconstitutional," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ, which has filed numerous challenges against the HHS mandate, with one pending at the high court. "The HHS mandate requires a company or its owner to acquire a health insurance product even if it violates their religious beliefs. Such a measure not only violates the First Amendment of the Constitution, but federal law as well."

The ACLJ currently represents 32 individuals and corporations in seven pending actions against the government, including a case with a Petition for Certiorari currently pending before the high court. The ACLJ has obtained preliminary injunctive relief for its clients in all seven cases.   

In the amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court today, the ACLJ argues that the Mandate not only imposes "a very real and palpable injury" to those business owners affected but "substantially burdens their religious exercise" as well.

The HHS Mandate, the brief asserts, puts the very freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution at risk.

"Whether this country will continue to preserve the dignity of conscience and robustly protect religious freedom in the future largely depends on how this Court rules in the cases at bar," the brief contends. "If the government is permitted to conscript citizens through their businesses to pay for and provide drugs and services to which they are religiously and steadfastly opposed in violation of their conscience, as the government does through the Mandate, the liberties that our forefathers struggled to secure will be significantly diminished."

The high court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the HHS Mandate cases on March 25, 2014.

Led by ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the ACLJ is based in Washington, D.C. and is online at

For Print: Gene Kapp  (757) 575-9520
For Broadcast:  Alison Geist or Anna Hutsell (770) 813-0000

SOURCE American Center for Law and Justice