The Rapidian Home

Right to Life Michigan files lawsuit in protest of Obamacare

On November 4, Right to Life Michigan filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in protest of Obamacare. The organization argues Obamacare compromises the integrity of the organization's mission, forcing the organization to cover all forms of birth control.


The Affordable Care Act, most commonly known as Obamacare, is a controversial topic in politics and also for many people of faith. Right to Life Michigan recently filed a federal lawsuit against Obamacare. The lawsuit specifically targets specific people who work in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Right to Life is a national organization whose website states, “The mission of Right to Life is to protect and defend the most fundamental right of humankind, the right to life of every innocent human being from the beginning of life to natural death.” Right to Life Michigan is the branch of Right to Life located in Michigan.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandates birth control coverage. Right to Life Michigan takes issue with the required coverage of all forms of birth control.

Ed Rivet, legislative director for Right to Life Michigan, explained why the lawsuit was filed and what parts of the Affordable Care Act he believes are unconstitutional.

“It’s not that the law is unconstitutional, per se, but that implementation of the law violates our constitutional rights,” Rivet said. “There is nothing in the law that says abortion and birth control should be covered, but it is how the law is being implemented. The law could have passed and they could have decided not to require coverage of all forms of birth control, but they are.”

Right to Life Michigan opposes all forms of birth control whose use could result in an abortion, including “Ella,” a birth control pill that can cause abortions, and the intrauterine device (IUD). Rivet did not state Right to Life’s position on the morning after pill, saying, “the jury is still out on that one.”

The lawsuit claims Right to Life Michigan’s freedom of religion and freedom of speech is being violated by the Affordable Care Act, because it forces the organization to provide coverage for all forms of birth control, even though the organization actively advocates against some forms of birth control.

Rivet says Right to Life Michigan is in a unique position because they are neither a religious company nor a business.

“This is a unique issue for us because we are not a business, and we are not affiliated with the church, but we are an organization focused on protecting human life,” Rivet said. “Our issue with Obamacare has a narrow focus, in that we only oppose specific kinds of birth control. We are also in a unique position in that the law forces us to violate our organization’s mission.”

Right to Life Michigan is one of the many businesses and organizations with lawsuits filed against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Rivet also mentioned Right to Life Michigan’s reason for the lawsuit, saying that he does not believe it was the federal government’s right to require coverage of all birth control.

“This was an extreme overreach for the federal government to say that we have to provide this coverage,” Rivet said, “especially when this coverage conflicts with our mission. We are not given the discretion to decide. It’s offensive to people whether it is their religious beliefs, their morals, or their organizational mission. In this case, the Obama administration has gone too far.”

In addition to the lawsuit filed on Nov. 4, Right to Life Michigan began a petition in June 2013 supporting the “Abortion Insurance Opt-Out Act.” The organization needed to collect 258,088 signatures in 180 days. Right to Life Michigan submitted the petition with 315,000 signatures, two months before the deadline. This petition would allow Michigan to join the other 23 states that have opted out of abortion coverage, as long as the majority of Michigan’s Senate and House uphold the ACA.

Rivet said that the petition dealt specifically with abortion coverage through the Affordable Care Act, and the lawsuit deals with contraception coverage through the ACA.

“The petition and the lawsuit deal with two entirely different issues, both involving Obamacare,” Rivet said. “The petition is about abortion being covered by health care. According to the Affordable Care Act, it is the ability of the state to opt-out of abortion coverage.” 


NOTE: This article originally appeared, in slightly different form, in Calvin Chimes.

The Rapidian, a program of the 501(c)3 nonprofit Community Media Center, relies on the community’s support to help cover the cost of training reporters and publishing content.

We need your help.

If each of our readers and content creators who values this community platform help support its creation and maintenance, The Rapidian can continue to educate and facilitate a conversation around issues for years to come.

Please support The Rapidian and make a contribution today.

Comments, like all content, are held to The Rapidian standards of civility and open identity as outlined in our Terms of Use and Values Statement. We reserve the right to remove any content that does not hold to these standards.