In your eagerness to celebrate New Year’s last week you might have missed some incredible news that made headlines across the nation. The news is so astonishing that it has liberal pundits and talking heads baffled and conservatives rejoicing for the decision handed down by Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor.

An AP article explains:

“Justice Sonia Sotomayor late Tuesday night decided to block implementation of the contraceptive coverage requirement, only hours before the law’s insurance coverage went into effect on New Year’s Day. Her decision, which came after federal court filings by Catholic-affiliated groups from around the nation in hopes of delaying the requirements, throws a part of the president’s signature law into temporary disarray. At least one federal appeals court agreed with Sotomayor, issuing its own stay against part of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.”

What this means, presently, is that the Obama administration must now respond to the temporary injunction by making it permanent or absolving it entirely. A decision is expected sometime today.

This is good news for a couple of reasons. First is obviously that it prevents religiously affiliated non-profit groups, charities, and hospitals from being forced to provide contraceptives and others services against their religious convictions. The government has no business forcing Americans to buy anything, much less those things which violate their religious convictions. For this reason the decision by Justice Sotomayor is a blessing.

Secondly, this decision is good news because it came from one of President Obama’s liberal SCOTUS appointees. This was not a decision handed down by Justice Thomas, or Scalia; this decision was handed down by one of the most junior and liberal justices on the court. That fact alone no doubt has liberals and conservatives alike shaking their heads.

During the vetting process for Sotomayor abortion rights groups expressed their concern over whether or not Sotomayor could be counted on to uphold Roe V. Wade. A New York Times article from 2009 reveals the concern of pro-abortion groups:

“In nearly 11 years as a federal appeals court judge, President Obama’s choice for the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, has never directly ruled on whether the Constitution protects a woman’s right to an abortion. But when she has written opinions that touched tangentially on abortion disputes, she has reached outcomes in some cases that were favorable to abortion opponents. Now, some abortion rights advocates are quietly expressing unease that Judge Sotomayor may not be a reliable vote to uphold Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 abortion rights decision.”

The order came after a Colorado based group filed a motion seeking exemption from the HHS mandate. The Little Sisters of the Poor is a non-profit religiously affiliated group that seeks to serve ill people in one of their 30 homes across the country. Working on behalf of the Little Sisters, Mark Rienzi, senior legal counsel with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, lauded the decision. The Becket Fund noted that to date injunctions like the one issued by Justice Sotomayor have been granted in 18 out of 20 cases.

The government continues to claim that sufficient accommodations to religious organizations have been made within ObamaCare. That statement is nothing short of deceptive and false. The appeals court that initially rejected the appeal by the Little Sisters of the Poor, however, continues to advance this false narrative. A recent article states:

“In his opposition to granting the archbishop’s request, Circuit Judge David S. Tatel wrote in a dissent yesterday that the archbishop is unlikely to prevail in the appeal. Like Jackson, Tatel said changes to the law have alleviated the burden that the mandate imposes on religious organizations. The church-related plaintiffs argue that availing themselves of a process to self-certify their religious objections forces them to help make birth control available.”

The only exemptions guaranteed in ObamaCare are for churches. Religiously affiliated non-profits, religious schools and hospitals are not adequately protected. If those entities were sufficiently protected they would not be suing the federal government at alarming rates to have the HHS mandate halted. But as we’ve seen throughout the course of 2013, lawsuits abound across the country simply because adequate protections and exemptions do not exist.

What remains to be seen is the outcome of this stunning decision by Justice Sotomayor. She gave the administration until 11 AM today to respond to her injunction. It’s hard to determine at this point how this will play out.

However, this is good news because it once again shows just how damaging to religious freedom the HHS mandate is on religious affiliated organizations. Will the administration dig their heels in and continue to defend a law that is nearly universally hated and causing the president’s approval number to spiral downward? Will the administration seek to gain favor with people by eliminating this awful measure? Those are questions we won’t know the answers to just yet. It seems 2014 is already interesting.

UPDATE: DOJ Rejects Nuns’ Argument on Contraception Mandate