Sebelius Against the Catholics...And the Rule of Law

Not to pat myself on the back or nuthin', but Michael Greve (curtsy The Corner) has noticed what I've been arguing for two years: that when the HHS Secretary has complete discretion over to whom the rule of law applies, there is in fact no rule of law.

He adds the new wrinkle that it's a bit rich for the HHS Secretary to refuse to grant waivers to religious institutions to not cover abortifacient drugs and elective sterilizations for reasons of conscience, when she has granted hundreds of waivers to businesses of all kinds from having to comply at all.

“This ‘process’ has been playing out while Mrs. Sebelius’s office has issued hundreds of waivers for employer health plans that fail to comply with the ACA’s and HHS’s exalted standards, such as “mini-med” plans used by McDonald’s. Without those waivers, the ranks of the uninsured would swell. Hiding the ACA’s inanity is sufficient reason to suspend the legal requirements; First Amendment objections apparently aren’t.”
Greve adds:
“[T]he entire Affordable Care Act, from coverage mandates to health exchanges to tax penalties, is being implemented by waiver and interim regulations. It can’t be implemented any other way: the insurance markets would collapse, and we’d still be noticing and commenting in 2020. A statute that compels the systematic corruption of the rule of law has no place in the U.S. Code.”
Quite. Or as I put it: "there is no law, there is only the whim of the Sec. of HHS."