Caroline J. Berdzik, chair of Goldberg Segalla’s Health Care Practice Group and co-chair of its Labor and Employment Practice Group, was interviewed by Thompson Information Services for an article discussing the impact of the recent U.S. Supreme Court “Hobby Lobby” ruling that “closely held” for-profit companies may opt out of providing certain forms of contraception based on religious grounds and the implications that presents for self-insured and other employee-sponsored health coverage.
One problem appears to be the lack of a definition for the term: “closely held.” Attorneys are probably working now to find valid definitions of that term, said Caroline.
“More and more parts of the law are being called in the question; and the government is retreating on issue after issue. The government is on the defensive now, because [it failed to predict] the business implications of the ACA’s rules and mandates, and it is having to change many rules on many fronts.”
The fact that resistance comes from such a wide variety of sectors — unions and large employer plans, and organizations across all sectors of the economy — shows that it clashes with so many different groups’ vested interests. It is an indicator that the government underestimated the implications of what it was trying to do, Caroline said.