Healthcare care law before the nine justices. We are opening up for months to hear your reactions. Give us a call. Emocrats, 202 7488001. Democrats 202 7488000 republicans, 202 7488001. Ndependents 202 7488002 outside the u. S. , 202 7488003. You. Monday morning to headlines about the Supreme Court cost decision the Supreme Courts decision. Health law back in the high court to the front page of the National Section of the New York Times, the Supreme Court to hear another case of contraception and religion. Partontraceptive mandate of the Affordable Care act requiring employers to cover 20 types of fda approved drugs and services as part of their health plans. The Washington Times noting the glue the groups that brought this case equate morning after pills with abortion. To explain more we turn to lawrence hurley, reuters Supreme Court correspondent. Good morning. Explain what is being challenged and who brought this case back to the Supreme Court. To an this is a challenge accommodation the administration introduced to deal with religious objections held by groups that are not religious institutions but our nonprofit groups that have religious affiliations. , certain nonprofits that provide services that are related to religious groups. Host review of this decision has come before the Supreme Court before. Review how this is different from that case. Companyhe issue was a could have a religious objection to the contraception coverage requirement and the court said it could. , in 2014, companies could not make use of the same the religiousthat groups can. The administration has said they accept there are grounds for religious objections but they had this accommodation that they think it deals with that concern. Host is this the make or break case for obamacare . Guest no. This case only deals with the religious objection to the contraception provisions. Does not have any bearing on the broader state of the law. Host explain what the objection is to this accommodation. They feel like even participating in the accommodation would be against religious beliefs. Explain the argument. Guest under the accommodation can certify that they have a religious objection. Either their insurer or to the administration itself. As the government has it they then are so does taken out of the process so they dont have to be party to the whole issue of providing contraception coverage. The groups say the act of having to sign that form is aiding people in getting the coverage is the object to. Host what is this case expected to be heard . Guest i think the hobby lobby case will be the one that most people will look to in which the won. Ctors the case will be argued in march. We will get a ruling sometime before the end of june. Host it puts reproductive rights back on the radar of the Supreme Court but there is an expectation that there was going to be a larger abortion ruling by the Supreme Court this term. Where are we on a challenge taken up by the Supreme Court . Guest we could be hearing soon in the next week or so whether the court is going to hear a thatenge to the texas law imposed new restrictions on abortion clinics. If the court takes that case that would be the courts big case on the issue since 2007. Host for viewers looking to follow these cases, what is the name of the cases that the viewers should be watching a four . Watching out for . Inst a texas case pending the court and the second his concerns mississippis similar law that has a similar provision. The court could be acting on those in the next week or so. Host lawrence hurley, always appreciate your time on the washington journal. We are asking viewers to wait in on the Supreme Court taking in taking up the contraceptive issue. 202 7488000 democrats. 202 7488001, republicans. Independents. , so cheap asking viewers to respond to the Supreme Court cciision lawrence so asking viewers to respond to the decision. To controller for you to get their Birth Control from other sources or find another job. Theres a constitutional right to practice religious beliefs. There is no constitutional right to Birth Control. Members of Congress Taking to twitter last week issuing press releases as well in light of the Supreme Courts announcement that they are taking up this challenge to the contraceptive mandate. Jan is a member of the energy and commerce committee. She tweeted out on friday, it is 2015, do we really need to Supreme Court to decide with a woman should be able to access Birth Control . Republican tim shoretel tweeted one of the republican sent out a release on friday after this decision was diane black, a republican from tennessee. Author of the healthcare conscience right at which would end which would exempt employers and nonprofits and those who quit made these challenges from the contraceptive mandate. In her statement she says, we have known obamacares hhs mandate is a flagrant violation of religious freedom. Under this law, countless nonprofits and ministries from the Little Sisters of the poor to priests for life face an impossible choice to deny their or faceeld beliefs fines that will undoubtedly force them to close their doors. Being an american has always tont enjoying the freedom live by the dictates of ones faith both at home and in the public square. Issue coming after the 2014 highprofile hobby lobby case, one of the highprofile cases the court will be taking up this year. We will be covering it here. We are getting your thoughts as we begin this process with the Supreme Court taking up this case. The Washington Times story on this decision notes that Justice Department attorneys have compared the nonprofits to Conscientious Objectors who duck the draft and want to block the government from naming someone else to fight for them. The Washington Times noting luis saying, if the court employers,vor of women will lose eight guaranty benefited by the a benefit guaranteed by law. We are taking your thoughts. Democrats, 202 7488000. Republicans, 202 7488001. Ndependents, 202 7488002 victor is on the line from democrats cartersville, georgia. Caller good morning. I am tired of people trying to say that obamacare is antireligion. Like abortionont but i think of woman i think a woman has a right over her body and nobody has a right to deny them that right. Host thanks for the call. Did you watch the hobby lobby case . Did you follow the Supreme Court decisions . Caller i have not. Host do you plan to follow with this term . Caller yes i do. I hope the Supreme Court once opposes obamacare and the woman right to have an abortion. If they dont, theyre going to open up a pandoras box. Host the abortion issue could come up this term. We will watch for news possibly as early as the next couple of weeks. Carol calling in from ohio on the line for democrats. Caller i agree with the last guy. I think this would be a great disservice to all the women that want to have this. I think some of those nuns, only have to do is fill out a form and city want to opt out and they can opt out say they want to opt out and they can opt out. Briefthey argue in their that even anticipating in filling out those forms make them complicit in this process of obtaining Birth Control and things like the morningafter pill. Caller the only time they are doing it is if they are forced to do it and did not have the opt out. With the opt out, it is done. They dont have to worry about it. I dont go with that at all. My religion is my religion and their religion is their religion. I have as good as them as saying my religions as i can do this or whatever. I get really upset with these rightwingers doing this kind of stuff. Host do you think it makes a difference if the employer is a religiously affiliated college or nonprofit . Caller they can fill up the form and opt out of it. Isnt that what they can do . Host that is the option they have right now. Caller all they have to do is to that. I dont see anything wrong with that. Thats not making them have the contraceptives after that. They are using their religious freedom to do that. Rufus is calling from adrian, michigan. Good morning. Caller good morning. Hope that the Supreme Court religiousin favor of freedom. Its not my intention to be in opposition to a womans right to choose. I understand to some degree the. Ature of the laws and so forth what i see is that there is such a divide in the nation over this issue and that either side causes the other side to suffer consequences onto the law and constitution that are problematic, i would hope that eventually the republicans in the democrats would take the issue off of the table so to speak. Thatld suggest to congress a law be passed for those people to have certain religious beliefs that measures would be taken where those religious beliefs can be respected without womansy impacting a right to choose. I personally believe that contraception is an option that women should have. I also believe that most forms of abortion are of government are repugnant. I would leave that to the woman and her creator to decide what is best for her. Laws and is using faithg to force people of to accept a position that is repugnant to their beliefs and thoughts which is no different and qualitative means people at people of bul people of beliefs submit to thoughts of people that will believe medical issues in terms of a woman being offered by the state, meaning the nation. In those terms i would hope that eventually congress would lay this issue to rest and there is no good answer that can readily come out of the Supreme Court except to affirm religious freedom while suggesting to congress that Congress Needs to write reasonable laws to protect those of religious faith and those that believe certain types of Birth Control and means of abortion. Host a few tweets that a come in over the course of this conversation. The First Amendment protects the religious rights of all americans. Institutions, no Birth Control mandate. Another tweet from edwin who says when the rights of one person trump the rights of another we might as well taught toss out the constitution. Ruth Benjamin Smith writes, whatever happened to the separation of church and state. Read is up next from union, washington. For republicans. Good morning. Caller i wanted to say a caller earlier made this point. She did not appreciate the white ringers perspective on this the rightwingers perspective on this. This is an American Opinion of what your rights are. I believe abortion is wrong. Anybody from either side of the aisle ultimately believes it is wrong but i believe in not letting the government make these decisions for a human being. Result is to get rid of Obama Roberts care. The employers or anybody else is not put in the position where they have to be forced to do something against what their beliefs are. This is an example if you let the government get involved in this, nothing ever works out. The democrats seem to always kneejerk to let the government decide the sorts of things. I believe in a womans right to choose and leave it there. Host before you go, there was a New York Times editorial about this on saturday after the Supreme Court announced they were taking up this case. The Editorial Board rights that this lawsuit like several others before it is a well orchestrated assault on the rights of women to control their bodies and thus the course of their lives by deciding if and when they will have a child. D. C. It in that light do you see it in that light . Caller i dont see it as being well orchestrated. I think it could be any issue in the abstract thats going to hit the Supreme Court 10 to 20 years from now. But if it has to do with the government deciding what is constitutional, thats fine but if it has to do with the government making a law like obamacare that says that employers have to provide health , Birth Control pills, when the reality is the government should not be making those decisions. We should not be paying for it at the federal level. You hear this that a woman is being denied. A woman has a right to buy those pills. Why is it anyone else is paying for it . No one is denying them anything if the employer or government itself is not paying for it. Let them pay for it on their own. We are talking about the Supreme Court should note our new series, landmark cases, continues tonight at 9 00 p. M. In 1944, the 70,000urt upheld of them u. S. Citizens to internment camps in world war ii. Tonight well talk about the case and the decision on landmark cases. That is live at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan, cspan three and cspan radio. The Supreme Court taking up the contraceptive mandate the contraception mandate. I wanted to agree with the previous caller and put in a different spin on it as an evangelical christian. I have been witnessing outside of abortion clinics at times and i have my opinions and i think the constitution provides for the common good it is not majority rules. In that vein i get in trouble with evangelical brothers and sisters i think are trying to push this down. We believe in free will. God gave us free will and there is so much sin even rethink a wrong thought even if you think a wrong thought that evangelical christians have sinned. So many things that are wrong we cannot control peoples minds and hearts. We can be out there trying to tell them the truth and see things like china, what is happening when they enforce abortion. They are in dire straits, that country. I feel the cubs to should provides for the common good i feel the constitution provides for the common good. I am not saying that i would provide funding or i think the federal government should provide funding for that woman because i think the life of the child is precious and there are many other options for her. It is not difficult to give up nine months of your life even if you do not think you can provide for that child or do not want that child. So many other options. , do we arent is doing not believe in free will and in the power of the lord to change lives . You will help these women. You will try and tell them the truth but ultimately it is their choice. Unfortunately it is another life. They dont believe that. They dont understand that yet. Host the key component of this case is the participation in the workaround that the administration has provided. Do you think an employer participating in that workaround, filling of the shifts then this, cost of this to the insurers and not the employers themselves, does that make the employer complicit in whatever eventual decision the employee makes, whether it is the useful morning after pill or some other form of Birth Control . Caller i dont think so. I used to work for the Catholic Diocese here. Who used Health Services to get abortions in the diocese. I dont think that was right. It is their right. That is why health care is here. We have to have that available for everybody. I am not god police of somebody elses life. Im here to witness the truth to them. Our country needs to change. We have a lot of things that are wrong and a lot of issues were people are being marginalized and disrespected on many different levels. If you going to speak about this yesterday look into your life and see all the other things. This cannot be our major focus. I dont think abortion is to be a major focus and i think the government needs to stay at of it as well. We need to give those women other options. Host heather is waiting in fort washington, maryland. Caller my comment is that as an employee i have been paying into my medical funds for years. Why is it that people believe that the employer gets to make the decision but the employees who have been paying into the medical fun for years have no coverage the in whether the coverage infringes on my beliefs should i not have . A say in whether i get to have my birthcontrol coverage . Or lets say my birthcontrol medicine that helps me with ovary cysts or other medical conditions covered . Host did you follow the hobby lobby case or you come to this issue through this case . Isler i feel that everyone talking about the employers making decisions about your medical coverage because they are paying for it and they are saying that if they are paying for it that they are being forced against their religious beliefs to pay for it. I half religious beliefs i have religious beliefs and my rights would also be infringed because if i am paying for my medical insurance every week at of my paycheck otherwise i dont get it. Why are my rights less important and my decisions and my needs less important than my employer . Im an individual and they are a conglomerate. Host heather perhaps previewing some of the arguments we may hear before the Supreme Court as they take up the mandate. The decision came on friday to take up a series of challenges to the contraceptive the contraception mandate. Jay is up next. Good morning. Caller good morning. What upsets me is having politicians get involved in contraception, abortion, womens medical issues and so on. They want to defund this, they want to take the right of abortion away from women, even if