Chair ronen good morning. The meeting will come to order. Welcome to the september 21, 2020 meeting of the rules committee. I am supervisor Hillary Ronen, chair of the committee. With me on the call is rules Committee Vice chair Catherine Stefani and supervisor gordon an m mar. I would like to thank sfgovtv for staffing this meeting. Mr. Clerk, do you have any announcements . Yes, d clerk yes. Due to the covid19 emergency, city hall and offices are closed. Members will participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were physically present. Public comment will be available on each item on this agenda. Both channel 26 and other various cable channels and sfgov sfgovtv. Org are streaming the numbers across the stream. Public comment and opportunities to speak are available via phone by calling 4156550001. The meeting i. D. Is 1468449547. Again, thats 1468449547. Then press pound, and pound again. When connected, you will hear the meeting discussions, but you will be muted and in
Of, in the meeting remotely. This is taken pursuant to the local state and federal orders, declarations and directives. Committee members who attend the meeting through Video Conference and participate to the meeting as if theyre physically present. Public comment will be available on each item. Both channel 26, sfgovtv are streaming the numbers across the screen. Public comment is available by calling 14156550001. Again, 14156550001. Meeting i. D. , 146 136 7075. Again, 146 136 7075. Then press pound twice. Youll hear the meeting discussion, but youll be muted and in listening mode only. When the item of interest comes up, dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. Best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or radio. You can make Public Comment in either of the following ways, conservative to myself or the budget and finance clerk. If you submit it via email, it will be forwarded it supervisors. Thank you, madame chair. S
In 2011, the government required employers to provide Insurance Coverage for all fda approved contraception, including many religious employers who objected to the coverage, sparking years of litigation. Traditions the best of this countrys commitment to religious liberty, the government sought to resolve the issue by promulgating new rules, excepting those employers who objected to the mandate. Those exemptions are lawful for two reasons. First, they are authorized by whichn 13a4 of the aca, requires employers to provide the types of coverage that the health, resources, and services of administration provide for and support. So it authorizes the agencies to require most employers to provide contraceptive coverage while exempting the small number of employers who have sincere Conscientious Objections. But it does not create an all or nothing choice. Require coverage for everyone or no one. Otherwise, the Longstanding Church exemption, the effective exemption for selfinsured church plan
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. This oral argument from may is just over an hour and a half. The honorable, the chief justice and the associate justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Oh yea, oh yea, all persons having business before the Supreme Court of the United States are admonished to give their attention as the court is now sitting. God save the United States and this honorable court. We will hear arguments in case 19431 Little Sisters of the poor v. Pennsylvania in the consolidated case. General francisco. Mr. Chief justice, may it please the court. In 2011, the government required employers to provide Insurance Coverage for all fda approved contraception, including many religious employers who objected to the coverage, sparking years of litigation. In 2017, in the best traditions of this countrys commitment to religious liberty, the government sought to resolve the issue by promulgating new rules, excepting those employers who objected t
Now sitting. God save the United States and this honorable court. We will hear arguments in case 19 431 Little Sisters of the poor v. Pennsylvania in the consolidated case. General francisco. Mr. Chief justice, may it please the court. In 2011, the government required employers to provide Insurance Coverage for all fda approved contraception, including many religious employers who objected to the coverage, sparking years of litigation. Traditions the best of this countrys commitment to religious liberty, the government sought to resolve the issue by promulgating new rules, excepting those employers who objected to the mandate. Those exemptions are lawful for two reasons. First, they are authorized by whichn 13a4 of the aca, requires employers to provide the types of coverage that the health, resources, and services of administration provide for and support. So it authorizes the agencies to require most employers to provide contraceptive coverage while exempting the small number of empl