Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Domino’s Pizza owner wins injunction on birth control mandate

Posted by on Jan. 2, 2013 at 10:02 PM
  • 12 Replies
1 mom liked this
A federal judge has ordered a temporary halt on the Obama administration’s birth-control coverage policy for Tom Monaghan, the Catholic billionaire who founded Domino’s Pizza.

Federal District Court Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff issued the decision Sunday, less than two days before the policy would have taken effect and exposed Monaghan to fines for non-compliance.

‚ÄúPlaintiff has shown that abiding by the mandate will substantially burden his exercise of religion,‚ÄĚ Zatkoff wrote.

‚ÄúThe government has failed to satisfy its burden of showing that its actions were narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest. ‚Ķ This factor weighs in favor of granting Plaintiffs‚Äô motion.‚ÄĚ

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/legal-challenges/275015-judge-halts-birth-control-policy-for-dominos-founder
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
by on Jan. 2, 2013 at 10:02 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
-Celestial-
by Pepperlynn on Jan. 2, 2013 at 10:17 PM
I wonder if they will offer paid maternity leave.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
jcrew6
by Jenney on Jan. 2, 2013 at 10:19 PM
1 mom liked this
How might maternity leave go against religious beliefs?


Quoting -Celestial-:

I wonder if they will offer paid maternity leave.

Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
29again
by Gold Member on Jan. 2, 2013 at 11:22 PM
2 moms liked this

I wonder if the owners of Hobby Lobby can use this in ANY way to support their case?  The fact that 2 businesses have the same issue, and get 2 different responses from 2 different judges just shows me how flawed the whole law is....  as if I needed proof of that.  But there it is!

jcrew6
by Jenney on Jan. 2, 2013 at 11:30 PM
They lost an emergency injunction. They have a "regular" injunction, like this one, pending.


Quoting 29again:

I wonder if the owners of Hobby Lobby can use this in ANY way to support their case?  The fact that 2 businesses have the same issue, and get 2 different responses from 2 different judges just shows me how flawed the whole law is....  as if I needed proof of that.  But there it is!


Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
coupon_ash_back
by on Jan. 2, 2013 at 11:49 PM
Good for them. (No sarcasm)
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
jcrew6
by Jenney on Jan. 2, 2013 at 11:50 PM
And here we have an example of "part of the problem" for hobby lobby. Region?



Quoting coupon_ash_back:

Good for them. (No sarcasm)


Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
coupon_ash_back
by on Jan. 2, 2013 at 11:51 PM
Why? I'm guessing you have opposing views.

Quoting jcrew6:

And here we have an example of "part of the problem" for hobby lobby. Region?






Quoting coupon_ash_back:

Good for them. (No sarcasm)



Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
29again
by Gold Member on Jan. 2, 2013 at 11:58 PM
1 mom liked this

OK.  So, Dominos is not subject (at this time) to the fines, but Hobby Lobby IS.  But they both have injunctions pending.  Is that correct?

Quoting jcrew6:

They lost an emergency injunction. They have a "regular" injunction, like this one, pending.


Quoting 29again:

I wonder if the owners of Hobby Lobby can use this in ANY way to support their case?  The fact that 2 businesses have the same issue, and get 2 different responses from 2 different judges just shows me how flawed the whole law is....  as if I needed proof of that.  But there it is!



jcrew6
by Jenney on Jan. 2, 2013 at 11:59 PM
1 mom liked this
I think it's great for dominos. But I think we need to be honest and look at the problem. I was adding on to your comment. 5 out of 6 injunctions have been awarded. Why was hobby lobby denied? But dominos awarded? Do we need to have a serious look at those who denied the injunction? Perhaps we should analyze the political interest of those who are awarding and denying. The inconsistency on the


"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Is astonishing in these matters.


Quoting coupon_ash_back:

Why? I'm guessing you have opposing views.



Quoting jcrew6:

And here we have an example of "part of the problem" for hobby lobby. Region?









Quoting coupon_ash_back:

Good for them. (No sarcasm)





Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
coupon_ash_back
by on Jan. 3, 2013 at 12:01 AM
1 mom liked this
I see. It should definitely be equal..

Quoting jcrew6:

I think it's great for dominos. But I think we need to be honest and look at the problem. I was adding on to your comment. 5 out of 6 injunctions have been awarded. Why was hobby lobby denied? But dominos awarded? Do we need to have a serious look at those who denied the injunction? Perhaps we should analyze the political interest of those who are awarding and denying. The inconsistency on the





"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."



Is astonishing in these matters.




Quoting coupon_ash_back:

Why? I'm guessing you have opposing views.





Quoting jcrew6:

And here we have an example of "part of the problem" for hobby lobby. Region?












Quoting coupon_ash_back:

Good for them. (No sarcasm)






Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)