Burwell V. Hobby Lobby Case Study

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby was a landmark decision by the US Supreme Court. It was for the first time that the court recognized a for-profit corporations’ religious beliefs. The decision was taken with regards to it being interpreted under the Religious Freedoms Restoration Act. By a 5-4 vote, the courts majority struck down the contraceptive mandate.

Associate Justice Samuel Alito delivered the judgment on behalf of the court and

four other justices joined him - Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas. The courts

majority decision meant that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993

applied to family-owned corporations like Hobby Lobby. These companies

cannot be forced to pay for insurance coverage for contraception for employees

due to religious

. . on the eligible

organization, the group health plan, or plan participants or beneficiaries.”

Justice Kennedy also concurred to the courts decision.

Dissent –

Justice Ginsbergs dissent argued that the Hobby Lobby case would open the

gates to many more such cases. She said that that could become a method to

“opt out of any law.” (page 1 under the topic of Ginsberg’s dissent) She said that

by overlooking the employees’ beliefs and only looking at a small group of

people who own the corporation is a conflict of rights. She rightfully said that

the employees of a for-profit organization have views and needs that are

different from their employers.(page 16 of dissent)

She then talked about how Hobby Lobby isn’t the only corporation requesting

changes in lieu of religious beliefs. The examples mentioned on page 32 of the

dissent clarify her claim - Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. where the

owner of a restaurant chain refused to serve to black people based on