ACLJ Asks Supreme Court to Hear ObamaCare Religious Freedom Challenge

" . . . we represent clients who not only believe ObamaCare is a flawed law, but argue that being forced to participate . . . violates their religious beliefs," said Jay Sekulow, ACLJ Chief Counsel

WASHINGTON, Jan. 11, 2012—Legal action aimed at ObamaCare argues the program’s individual mandate, forcing Americans to purchase health insurance or pay annual penalties, violates the rights of those who oppose health insurance on religious grounds. The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) is ugrging the U.S. Supreme Court to accept its challenge to the health care law on the grounds that its case is separate and distinct from other ObamaCare-related litigation pending before the Court.

"The case we are making in our appeal to the high court is that we represent clients who not only believe ObamaCare is a flawed law, but argue that being forced to participate in ObamaCare - under penalty of law - violates their religious beliefs under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA)," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ.

The ACLJ filed a reply brief with the Supreme Court today appealing a lower court decision that upheld the dismissal of its lawsuit challenging ObamaCare’s constitutionality. Because the ACLJ's case includes a unique religious freedom claim, the nation's top conservative public interest law firm argues that its suit provides the Court with an additional vehicle by which to consider the impact of the individual mandate - in particular, on those Americans who object to purchasing health insurance for religious reasons.

Now, the ACLJ is asking the high court to consider its appeal in tandem with the Florida health care case currently on the court’s docket. In the Florida appeal, the ACLJ is representing 117 members of Congress and more than 100,000 Americans in filing an amicus brief last week. It asks the Justices to rule that ObamaCare’s unconstitutional individual mandate is inextricably linked to the law itself, and therefore, the entire law must be rejected.

The ACLJ is also preparing to file amicus briefs next month with the Supreme Court concerning two other ObamaCare issues now being considered by the Justices. The ACLJ will argue that the Anti-Injunction Act, which prohibits lawsuits that prevent the assessment or collection of taxes, does not apply to ObamaCare. In a separate brief, the ACLJ will address why the individual mandate is unconstitutional.

The high court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on the challenges to ObamaCare during a three-day period in March.

Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice focuses on constitutional law and is based in Washington.

-30-