Favorite

Hobby Lobby case affects more than just contraception 

I've known for years that the founders of Hobby Lobby and I diverged on some fundamental societal values. Still, lacking the patience for activities such as scrapbooking or candle-making, the store has never been relevant to me; avoiding it created as little personal sacrifice as veering away from Chick-fil-A (as a vegetarian, not much). Because of the corporation's lawsuit challenging a provision of the Affordable Care Act, heard this week by the U.S. Supreme Court, it's a company that soon may be deeply relevant to all Americans.

In a compromise that was key to the law's passage, most employers that provide employees health care coverage must now allow female employees to access all contraception methods without charging copays or other fees. Hobby Lobby (along with a Pennsylvania cabinet company in a separate case) argues that certain emergency contraception methods that must be covered veer into abortifacients and, therefore, the company is forced to choose between its core religious tenets and the large fine brought about by violating the act.

Obamacare will ultimately be recognized as one of the nation's most important sex antidiscrimination measures and the contraceptive provision is a key component of its being a force for equality. American women vary dramatically in access to contraceptive coverage and myriad studies have shown that even when women's insurers provide coverage, high copays often push women to use less effective methods or to use contraception in an inconsistent manner. The well-regarded Guttmacher Institute, which filed an amicus brief in the case, notes the disproportionate impact on working class women. Starting to use implants and IUDs have costs equal to a minimum-wage worker's monthly pay; emergency contraception used in the most dire circumstances is similarly not fiscally feasible for many women. But, the import of the case goes far beyond women's equality.

Hobby Lobby grounds its claims in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) of 1993, a law that was overwhelmingly passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton. Its purpose was, in essence, to overturn a 1990 Supreme Court case in which a majority opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia argued that religious practices should not trump a "neutral law of general applicability." The Supreme Court reasserted the 1990 decision in striking down RFRA as applied to state and local governments in a 1997 case.

The Hobby Lobby case centers on whether RFRA can be used to stymie a federal regulatory act. A victory by Hobby Lobby would give rise to challenges to current and future federal laws that infringe upon some private entities' religious tenets. Moreover, it will send a signal for how state-level RFRA's (several around the country, with more under consideration) will be analyzed by the federal courts. Most attention on this issue has focused on the implications of RFRA's in "protecting" those with religious objections from being subject to laws that bar discrimination against gays and lesbians, but others have argued with a straight face that minimum wage laws and health and safety rules intrude into their core religious beliefs. Thus, a win for Hobby Lobby has the potential to create "a system in which each conscience is a law unto itself" (to quote Justice Scalia from the 1990 decision).

Finally, a victory for Hobby Lobby would only further cement the rise of corporations as "persons" in the eyes of the Supreme Court. While the infamous Citizens United case in 2010 granted corporations First Amendment protections in the realm of political speech, a favorable ruling for the corporations here would extend the constitutional rights of a corporation to another component of the First Amendment — free exercise of religion. As two authors of amicus briefs in the Hobby Lobby case point out, across the decades and across the ideological spectrum, Supreme Court justices have agreed that corporations should have only narrowly defined constitutional rights, differentiating them starkly from individuals. Another positive outcome for corporate personhood in this case would move us increasingly towards a reality where, indeed, "corporations are people, my friend." Such a reality would starkly limit the government's ability to control those corporations even when they engage in practices that are harmful to society.

The current Supreme Court has tended toward narrow decisions saving some aspects in key cases to be answered later. Thus, the legal questions related to religious freedom and corporate personhood that are part of the Hobby Lobby case may not be fully answered this year. Yet even a nudge in one direction or the other will have big ramifications for more than just access to contraceptives.

Favorite

Speaking of Hobby Lobby, Obamacare

Comments

Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

More by Jay Barth

  • Arkansas voters know what they want

    With a surprisingly strong vote, 53 percent of Arkansas's voters said last Nov. 8 that they wanted to bring medical marijuana to the state.
    • Feb 23, 2017
  • Resist Gorsuch

    Barring the bizarre, Judge Neil Gorsuch will become one of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court by the time the court reconvenes for its new term in October.
    • Feb 9, 2017
  • Can the U.S. Senate live up to its potential?

    I recently wandered back to "Master of the Senate," the third volume of Robert A. Caro's massive history of Lyndon Johnson. The book, on Johnson's years in the U.S. Senate, highlights the lingering power of the Senate to meet the challenges facing the country and to stand up to existential threats facing American democratic institutions.
    • Jan 12, 2017
  • More »

People who saved…

Readers also liked…

  • Ban the box in Little Rock

    In the latest evidence of the impact of the Black Lives Matter movement in shaping the American policy agenda, this past week has become "ban the box" week.
    • Nov 4, 2015

Most Shared

  • Architecture lecture: Sheila Kennedy on "soft" design

    Sheila Kennedy, a professor of architecture at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and founder of Kennedy & Violich Architecture Ltd., will give the June Freeman lecture tonight at the Arkansas Arts Center, part of the Architecture + Design Network series at the Arkansas Arts Center.
  • Petition calls for Jason Rapert Sewage Tanks in Conway

    A tribute is proposed for Conway's state senator Jason Rapert: naming the city's sewage sludge tanks for him. Petitioners see a similarity.
  • Health agency socked with big verdict, Sen. Hutchinson faulted for legal work

    A former mental health agency director has won a default judgment worth $358,000 over a claim for unpaid retirement pay and Sen. Jeremy Hutchinson is apparently to blame for failure to respond to pleadings in the case.
  • Religious right group calls for compromise on damage lawsuit amendment

    The Family Council, the religious right political lobby, has issued a statement urging its followers to oppose the so-called tort reform amendment to limit attorney fees and awards in damage lawsuits.
  • Constituents go Cotton pickin' at Springdale town hall

    Sen. Tom Cotton, cordial to a fault, appeared before a capacity crowd at the 2,200 seat Pat Walker Performing Arts Center at Springdale High tonight to a mixed chorus of clapping and boos. Other than polite applause when he introduced his mom and dad and a still moment as he led the crowd in a recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance — his night didn't get much better from there.

Latest in Jay Barth

  • Arkansas voters know what they want

    With a surprisingly strong vote, 53 percent of Arkansas's voters said last Nov. 8 that they wanted to bring medical marijuana to the state.
    • Feb 23, 2017
  • Resist Gorsuch

    Barring the bizarre, Judge Neil Gorsuch will become one of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court by the time the court reconvenes for its new term in October.
    • Feb 9, 2017
  • Can the U.S. Senate live up to its potential?

    I recently wandered back to "Master of the Senate," the third volume of Robert A. Caro's massive history of Lyndon Johnson. The book, on Johnson's years in the U.S. Senate, highlights the lingering power of the Senate to meet the challenges facing the country and to stand up to existential threats facing American democratic institutions.
    • Jan 12, 2017
  • More »

Visit Arkansas

Little River County gears up for Sesquicentennial

Little River County gears up for Sesquicentennial

Historical entertainment planned for joint celebration of three Southwest Arkansas milestone anniversaries

Event Calendar

« »

February

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28  

Most Viewed

  • Arkansas voters know what they want

    With a surprisingly strong vote, 53 percent of Arkansas's voters said last Nov. 8 that they wanted to bring medical marijuana to the state.

Most Recent Comments

  • Re: Arkansas voters know what they want

    • Oh, they're doing the jobs they are paid to do. But first we must ask…

    • on February 26, 2017
  • Re: Stand up for Little Rock

    • Just tell us the whole deal like we were little children with no understanding. I…

    • on February 26, 2017
  • Re: Arkansas voters know what they want

    • It is inappropriate for disgruntled legislators to take revenge upon the citizens of the state…

    • on February 25, 2017
 

© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation