We can look forward to decades of decisions like this, thanks to every Democrat who voted for Roberts and Scalia:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Dying of cancer, Thomas Amschwand did everything he was told to make sure his wife would collect on the life insurance policy he had through his employer. “He was obsessed with dotting every `i’ and crossing every `t’,” Melissa Amschwand-Bellinger recalled about her husband, who died in 2001 at age 30. But Spherion Corp., the temporary staffing company where Amschwand worked, told Amschwand-Bellinger she would not receive any of the $426,000 in benefits she believed she was due. When she went to court, Spherion succeeded in getting her lawsuit thrown out. The Supreme Court on June 27 refused to review the case.

Amschwand-Bellinger received a refund of the few thousand dollars in insurance premiums she and her husband dutifully had paid. The total, she said, would not cover the costs of his funeral. The story has played out often under the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Designed to protect employee benefits, the law has been used by employers as a shield against suits.

Federal appeals courts, interpreting Supreme Court decisions dating to 1993, consistently have said companies that offer health, life and retirement benefits under ERISA cannot be sued for large amounts of money, or damages. Instead, they can be sued only for typically smaller sums such as Amschwand’s insurance premiums.

Several federal judges have bemoaned the unfairness even as they have felt constrained to rule in favor of employers.