Articles by Stanley Carlson-Thies
July 1, 2014
The Court said that for-profits aren't excluded from RFRA's protection of the exercise of religion (just look at the definitions of terms)—but that only sets in motion a series of tests: Does the law impose a "substantial burden" on the religious exercise of the organization or person? Does the government have a "compelling interest" to impose the burden? And if so, is it pursuing the "least restrictive" means of asserting that interest? There was no doubt the two companies have sincere religious convictions about the contraceptives; nor was there any doubt that they would incur massive financial penalties if they simply excluded the contraceptives or dropped health coverage entirely
August 22, 2013
The appeals court vindicated Hobby Lobby's claim that, even though it is a profit-making business, it can reasonably argue that it has a religious freedom right not to comply with the new requirement that employee health plans must cover all contraceptives, including emergency contraceptives that ca...