Cherry Creek Mortgage And Religious Freedom Win In Court Over Obamacare Mandate

Another district court put the brakes on the Obama Administration who is attempting to force its conscience-violating mandate on unwilling employers. Many employers—religious, secular, nonprofit, and for-profit—view the mandate as a violation of their right to free exercise of their faith, and it is. According to Heritage, “this decision brings the scorecard of for-profit cases to 29–5, strongly favoring the free exercise of religion.”

The plaintiff in this case was Cherry Creek Mortgage, a family-run home loan provider with 730 employees operated by evangelical Christians according to their faith. Cherry Creek Mortgage sued the government back in March of 2013, arguing that the mandate violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the First Amendment guarantee of the free exercise of religion.

At first, the court denied Cherry Creek’s request for a preliminary injunction to stop the mandate while the case was pending. However, in June, the Tenth Circuit found that Hobby Lobby—another evangelical owned for-profit corporation who challenged the anti-conscience mandate—was likely to succeed on the merits of its RFRA claim, stating that:

religious conduct…can be communicated by individuals and for-profit corporations alike.

The Third Circuit disagreed, so now the case and mandate is likely heading to the Supreme Court. You can take a sneak peek of the upcoming Supreme Court cases, by clicking here.

Cherry Creek had asked the court to reconsider due to the Hobby Lobby decision, and low and behold, yesterday the judge agreed. Granting a preliminary injunction, the judge found that Cherry Creek is faced with what the judge referred to as a:

Hobson’s Choice between a continuing infringement of religious freedom or potentially crippling monetary penalties…. each day that Cherry Creek is forced to provide the objectionable coverage their sincerely held religious beliefs are violated.

Cherry Creek no longer will have to comply with the conscience-violating mandate, at least while their case is pending.

Counsel for Cherry Creek stated:

People of faith in this nation, including business owners, have the constitutionally protected freedom to live and do business according to their faith. The Obama administration should not be attempting to deprive Americans of this cherished liberty.

The Heritage blogger was correct to refer to religious freedom as “Americans’ first freedom,” as the American colonies were established for that specific reason, no other. It was only in our religious freedom and faith did we find justification for Revolution, and our culture was linked by no stronger a force than our faith. Heritage, indeed, was correct to characterize this event as follows:

Yesterday’s order is another blow to the anti-conscience mandate and a step in the direction of safeguarding Americans’ first freedom.