Skip to main content

View Diary: In Hobby Lobby, Supremes grant religious objection rights to for-profit corporations. (340 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Question... (0+ / 0-)

    The dissent quoted above:

    Until this litigation, no decision of this Court recognized a for-profit corporation’s qualification for a religious exemption from a generally applicable law, whether under the Free Exercise Clause or RFRA.
    I've not read through the opinions, but from summaries I've read, it sounded like the majority relied on the RFRA rather than the free exercise clause for the meat of their decision.

    Is this the case?

    If so, a couple comments...

    The RFRA is relatively new -  having been passed barely over twenty years ago. In the absence of conflicting interpretations by the Supreme Court, the absence of any previous decision on this issue (the extent to which the RFRA "protects" closely held for-profit corporations) doesn't seem very relevant. Perhaps the Supreme Court has never been in a situation to answer the question before or, even, (less likely) the question never came up at any level.

    Since the RFRA is statutory law, it can be easily overturned through the political process by repealing or amending the RFRA. The question if the majority want this to happen, of course, is a question for the democratic process to resolve. Thus, it seems that there's more anxiety over this decision than necessary. (Elections, Consequences, all that...).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site