Panel examines legal, moral effects of HHS mandate

In light of Notre Dame’s continuing legal struggle against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) contraception mandate, the IrishRover, Notre Dame Right to Life and the Center for Ethics and Culture sponsored a panel discussion in the Carey Auditorium.

The April 15 event featured Gerard V. Bradley, Professor of Law at Notre Dame; Jeanette Burdell, Director of St. Joseph County Right to Life; Jessica Keating, Director of University Life Initiatives; and Erin Stoyell-Mulholland, president of Notre Dame Right to Life. Carter Snead, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Ethics and Culture, moderated the discussion, which consisted of presentations by each panelist and questions from the audience.

Bradley began, focusing on the details of the legal battle. The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled against the university’s lawsuit for relief from the mandate on February 21. The university has provided contraception to employees since January 1, while the case is being appealed, rather than face costly penalties.

“In fact, Notre Dame is complying with the requirements of the mandate,” Bradley said. “I should say its compliance is surely with an asterisk. The document Notre Dame is required to file in order to comply with the mandate, indicates in a notation typed by Notre Dame at the bottom of the second page, that Notre Dame does so under protest, that Notre Dame considers compliance to be a violation of its religious beliefs, and that should Notre Dame receive or obtain relief from the mandate in a court action, that Notre Dame would then withdraw its compliance with the mandate.”

The university’s lawsuit was one in a group of similar lawsuits from Church-affiliated institutions seeking relief from the mandate on the grounds of religious freedom. According to Bradley, only Notre Dame was denied relief and forced to provide contraception.

“We don’t have any other case like Notre Dame’s,” he explained. “As far as I can tell, Notre Dame is the only institution which has complied under duress … Every other institution who sought this relief got it before the gun was put to their head on December 31.”

As the legal battle continues, Bradley said he expects Notre Dame or another religious non-profit to appeal its case to the Supreme Court sometime in the next year.

“I doubt very much that Notre Dame’s will be that lead case that goes to the Supreme Court,” he continued. “For a variety of reasons I think it would probably be better if it was not. Some particular wrinkles in our case make it not the best vehicle for a Supreme Court review … But some case is very likely to go to the Supreme Court and be resolved by June of 2015.”

Junior Patrick Gallagher, an attendee, commented to the Rover: “I was especially interested by Professor Bradley’s comments about the the [Obama] administration’s potential responses to any non-compliance by Notre Dame and the way in which the move to actually collect the penalties could be a poor political move for the administration.”

The other panelists focused on how contraception conflicts with Notre Dame’s Catholic identity and the need for religious freedom. Keating showed an advertisement for Beyaz, a birth-control drug produced by Bayer, and explained how the ad trivialized family and child-rearing by comparing a baby to vacations and material goods.

“At a literal level, this ad commodifies relationships and children, positioning them on the same visual plane as a trip to Paris or a ranch-style home,” Keating explained. “So there’s a visual crassness in this ad’s representation of person as standing in equal value alongside things.”

Stoyell-Mulholland continued this idea, saying that the mandate sends a message to women that equality between the sexes can come only from women rejecting their natural fertility.

“The Catholic perspective fully embraces and integrates all aspects of a woman’s personhood,” she said. “Obama’s perspective tends to level the playing field with men, and sameness is key, whereas the Catholic perspective sees men and women as equal in dignity but intrinsically different.”

Burdell spoke about the side effects that contraception can have on women’s health, but concluded by clarifying that the university’s fight against the mandate is fundamentally about religious freedom.

“We’ve entered a slippery slope,” Burdell expressed. “By insisting that contraception is healthcare, like antibiotics, which it is not, Americans are being forced to accept it as mainstream medicine. We have pointed out the threat to human life and the health of women. There may be some who do not care about this, but for those who do, they should not be forced to impose this on others nor should they be forced to cooperate with what they perceive through scientific proof to be destructive of human life and health.”

Greg Hadley is a sophomore American studies and political science double major. Is this thing on? Contact him at ghadley@nd.edu.