Advertisement  

August 5, 2015
Court: WA Pharmacists Must Dispense Pills Despite
Moral Objections

San Francisco—In the latest case on whether religious believers can refuse services in certain circumstances, a federal appeals court has ruled that the State of Washington can require a pharmacy to dispense medication even if the business owner has a religious objection.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled against pharmacists who objected to delivering emergency contraceptives, overturning a lower court that had said state requirements were unconstitutional.

The U.S. Supreme Court, however, allowed closely held corporations to seek exemptions from the Affordable Care Act’s contraception requirement in a case involving Hobby Lobby Stores Ltd, which sought exemption on religious grounds.

The Washington law gives leeway to a religiously objecting individual pharmacist to refuse to fill a prescription as long as another pharmacist working at the same location provides timely delivery. The rules require a pharmacy to deliver all medications, even if the owner objects.

A unanimous three-judge 9th Circuit panel recently decided that those standards are constitutional, saying they were “rationally related” to Washington's interest in ensuring that its citizens have safe and timely access to lawfully prescribed medications. Speed is particularly important considering the time-sensitive nature of emergency contraception, the three-judge panel pointed out.

“The time taken to travel to another pharmacy, especially in rural areas where pharmacies are sparse, may reduce the efficacy of those drugs,” Judge Susan Graber wrote in the opinion.

The case was brought by Olympia, Washington–based Storman Inc., operating as Ralph’s Thriftway, and two pharmacists there. The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which advocated for the right of pharmacists in Washington to refuse services based on moral grounds, decried the court decision, noting that 30 pharmacies located within 5 miles of Ralph’s Thriftway dispense the morning-after pill.

The appeals court panel, meanwhile, emphasized that the ruling goes beyond just emergency contraception, explaining, “Evidence before the commission and at trial demonstrated that pharmacists and pharmacies had refused to fill prescription for several kinds of medications other than emergency contraceptives. Specific examples included refusals, for a variety of reasons, to deliver diabetic syringes, insulin, HIV-related medications, and Valium.”



Connect With U.S. Pharmacist
USP Google AppUSP Itunes App