Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Hobby Lobby


Coming down now: decision written by Alito

Closely held corporations cannot be required to provide contraception coverage.

The Court says that the government has failed to show that the mandate is the least restrictive means of advancing its interest in guaranteeing cost-free access to birth control.

This decision concerns only the contraceptive mandate and should not be understood to mean that all insurance mandates, that is for blood transfusions or vaccinations, necessarily fail if they conflict with an employer’s religious beliefs

This was a 5-4 ruling.

Opinion here:


Looks like Hobby Lobby wins!




This is another victory for religious freedom under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. It was a 5-4 decision that does not take on the larger first amendment issue. If a for profit corporation has this right, then it must follow that religious based organizations must have the same right.

We should all celebrate this for a day or so and then get back to work on protecting religious liberty. The evil one and his allies will not give up because of another decision that goes against them.


How long do you think it will take before the president announces that the federal government will pay for all those contraceptives?




I have not spoken to the Mr Obama, but my best guess is that he already had a bill to be introduced in case the Hobby Lobby decision went against him. Can he get such a bill through the House? Look for it to sneak through as an amendment to something really important. If that does not work he will make another end run around the constitution by executive order.


I think there already is a gov program already in place


Thanks be to God.


Yay! :stuck_out_tongue:


5 , , , 4 , , , 3 , , , 2

Less than 24 hours.


A very poorly thought out decision by the Supreme Court.


The decision just appeared on the Court website:


No bill (or Congress, for that matter) necessary. As you note, executive order is the new Legislative Branch in the eyes of this administration.




I don’t think we even need to look to know who voted for abortifacient mandates and who voted against. People should realize that it really matters who appoints justices to the Supreme Court. Those who value religious liberty should realize that a Democrat president will always oppose it.


Here is the actual opinion from the SCOTUS web site.


News link to prevent thread lock:

Needs fine print analysis, but sounds good based on the headline! :thumbsup:


Religious liberties will prevail.


I am so thrilled with this ruling! To be completely forthright, I was sure the decision was going to go against Hobby Lobby. This is one case where I am so grateful to be so wrong. :smiley:


Glory Be to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be.


Good to see. It was a close decision: 5-4. No surprises as to who the 5 were and who the 4 were. :stuck_out_tongue:


Note the 5-4 vote. Note who voted which way.

Please remember that the next time before you say that presidential elections don’t really have much impact on the Supreme Court makeup.


ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, and THOMAS, JJ., joined. KENNEDY, J., filed a concurring opinion. GINSBURG, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined, and in which BREYER and KAGAN, JJ., joined as to all but Part III–C–1. BREYER and KAGAN, JJ., filed a dissenting opinion.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit