NY Archdiocese, Dolan Score Major Victory

The following is from the Cardinal Newman Society:

The Obama administration has had great success with having lawsuits from Catholic institutions dismissed on the grounds that it’s too soon for them to sue or that the Administration may yet change some key ingredient in the HHS mandate to make it more palatable to Catholic organizations and individuals. But the Archdiocese of New York, led by Timothy Cardinal Dolan, just scored a big win.

On top of refusing to dismiss the case despite the Administration’s pleas, Judge Brian Cogan of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York delivered a scathing rebuke of the Administration’s argument. Kathryn Lopezpublished the judge’s words as:

Fundamentally . . . this Court cannot accept that the present costs incurred by plaintiffs are simply the result of their “desire to prepare for contingencies.” Quite frankly, ignoring the speeding train that is coming towards plaintiffs in the hope that it will stop might well be inconsistent with the fiduciary duties that plaintiffs’ directors or officers owe to their members. As explained above, the practical realities of administering health care coverage for large numbers of employees — which defendants’ recognize — require plaintiffs to incur these costs in advance of the impending effectiveness of the Coverage Mandate. That is a business reality that any responsible board of directors would have to appreciate.
Moreover, the First Amendment does not require citizens to accept assurances from the government that, if the government later determines it has made a misstep, it will take ameliorative action. There is no, “Trust us, changes are coming” clause in the Constitution. To the contrary, the Bill of Rights itself, and the First Amendment in particular, reflect a degree of skepticism towards governmental self-restraint and self-correction. . . . Considering the extraordinary political passion surrounding the Coverage Mandate from all sides, there is simply no way to predict what, if any, changes to the Coverage Mandate will be made, even if some policymakers favor certain changes.

The judge did, however, dismiss the complaints of the Rockland Diocese and Catholic Charities because it could not tell from the complaint and affidavits whether or not their plans qualified for grandfathered status which would exempt them from having to comply with the mandate.

You can read about this case in greater detail by reading Marc DeGirolami of Saint John’s University School of Law at The Mirror of Justice.