Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Breaking news

Posted in:

Illinois

From a press release:

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which specializes in constitutional law, today filed a lawsuit in state court in Illinois on behalf of two pharmacists challenging Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s emergency amendment to the state code requiring pharmacists to dispense medication even if filling the prescriptions violate their conscience and religious beliefs. The ACLJ lawsuit charges that the Governor’s order is unenforceable and urges the court to declare it null and void because it violates state law including the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act.

“This directive is not only legally flawed but it puts pharmacists in the untenable position of having to choose between adhering to their religious beliefs and violating a law that could cost them their jobs,” said Francis J. Manion, Senior Counsel of the ACLJ, which is representing the two pharmacists. “There are protections in place to prevent employees from being punished because of their religious beliefs. The Governor’s directive is out of step with state law and we are urging the court to issue an injunction that would block the enforcement of this directive and ultimately declare the Governor’s action null and void.”

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Apr 13, 05 @ 2:57 pm

Comments

You know, from what I’ve read, and following the argument laid out by the ACLJ, it seems the Gov’s order is flawed (legally). I think if the Court takes this up they will side with the ACLJ’s contention the order is in contradiction of the state’s Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act. At least, that is how I interpret the act as it pertains to this argument. What I haven’t read is what happened that prompted the Gov to issue this order with such pomp and circumstance? I know he loves this kind of easy press, but was it *really* necessary? And where is that video game bill? Has that made it to his desk? If so, he will have another court challenge to defend. Is this really a good way to spend taxpayer money? On fringe issues that seem to get more press (and blog conversation) than a Michael Jackson trial?

Comment by Bo Wednesday, Apr 13, 05 @ 3:13 pm
The problem, I think, is whether they are characterizing the Gov’s Executive order properly. Does anyone know where we can view it? I don’t believe the Executive Order requires these pharmacists to fill a prescription. I think it requires pharmacies to fill or refer. Big difference, because for-profit corporations don’t really have a conscience and can’t really have a right of conscience.

My guess is that, at the end of the day, this unnamed retailer will get mucho bad publicity and will find a way to comply with the law, or pro-life pharmacists will have to find a different occupation.

FYI, I’m not sure of the particulars of these cases, but if they do involve the morning after pill or emergency contraception, the courts may rule that HCRCA is not applicable because of 745 ILCS 70/6, which excludes emergency care. If not, watch for Julie Hamos to introduce legislation defining emergency contraception as emergency care. Add that legislation to the Dept. of Redundancy Redundancy, Rich.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Apr 13, 05 @ 5:14 pm
But the law does not require pharmacists to fill scripts against their conscience, it requires pharacies that sell contraceptives to sell them to everyone, regardless. So if a pharmacy has a pharmacist that has an issue with contraception, they need to have a non-objecting pharmacist to dispense.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Apr 13, 05 @ 5:20 pm
If they filed what they said in the press release, the ACLJ is going to get laughed out of court. The order doesn’t require a particular pharmacist to do anything and in the case of a pharmacy, it only requires that the pharmacy dispense what it already dispenses or not hold a prescription back from a patient who wishes to take it elsewhere.

The onus isn’t on an individual pharmacist so it’s hard to tell how the law would apply. Further, a pharmacy can choose not to carry drugs it finds offensive and seemingly just offer the prescription back to a consumer and let them fill it elsewhere.

I can’t speak to promulgation technicalities, but the Governor’s order is pretty narrow and entirely appropriate from a public health standpoint.

Pro-life pharmacists have two options–working in a pharmacy that doesn’t dispense drugs they find offensive or working out an accomodation with their employer that doesn’t require them to dispense such prescriptions.

Comment by ArchPundit Wednesday, Apr 13, 05 @ 5:30 pm
The pro-abortionists need to change the law.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Apr 13, 05 @ 6:55 pm
Why didn’t you say that the group was a Law firm founded by Pat Robertson to represent Christians in church-state cases.

What next, the Wal-Mart clerks can refuse to sell me condoms because they Roman Catholic or the Baptist can refuse to sell me Beer at Osco?

These people should change careers and stop watching the so much TV (i.e., the 700 and Fox news)

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Apr 13, 05 @ 7:32 pm
Strange that after almost two weeks from the date that the Executive Order was issued, along with the mandatory press release, we still can’t find the order posted on the Gov’s web site. Even worse–I can’t seem to find the emergency rule to verify exactly what the text requires. Anyone know where to find this information? There just seems to be a lot of confusion as to what specifically the Order and rule require.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Apr 13, 05 @ 9:01 pm
The ACLJ is giving Blagojevich the opportunity to look good to the majority of voters. He wins every time this issue comes up. The vast majority of voters support him on this.

The ACLJ seems not to care that it is in a lose-lose situation politically. The more they drag this out, the better Blagojevich looks.

Comment by Vanilla World Thursday, Apr 14, 05 @ 9:56 am