A Supreme Court case addressing religious freedom and corporate rights.

A Supreme Court case addressing religious freedom and corporate rights.

• A. Marbury v. Madison
• B. Brown v. Board of Education
• C. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2013)
• D. Roe v. Wade

Answer: (C)

Religious freedom and how it applies when a business is involved is the idea being tested. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. looked at whether for‑profit corporations can claim religious exemptions from a federal regulation under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The regulation in question was the contraception mandate of the Affordable Care Act, which required employers to provide certain birth-control coverage to employees. The Court said yes, under RFRA a closely held for‑profit corporation can be exempt if enforcing the regulation would burden the owners’ sincerely held religious beliefs. RFRA requires the government to show a compelling interest and use the least restrictive means when a law substantially burdens religious exercise. The majority found that applying the mandate to these corporations would impose a substantial burden on the owners’ religious beliefs, and that RFRA allowed exemptions in such circumstances. In this sense, the decision recognizes a form of corporate religious rights, grounded in the ownership and beliefs of the people behind the corporation, rather than granting a broad, general religious status to the corporation itself. This case doesn’t address other big questions about corporate power or personhood in general. It’s specifically about religious freedom as it applies to federal regulation under RFRA and whether those exemptions can extend to certain businesses based on their owners’ beliefs. Other listed cases focus on different issues altogether—Marbury v. Madison on judicial review, Brown v. Board of Education on desegregation and equal protection, Roe v. Wade on abortion rights—so they don’t fit the question’s focus.

Religious freedom and how it applies when a business is involved is the idea being tested. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. looked at whether for‑profit corporations can claim religious exemptions from a federal regulation under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The regulation in question was the contraception mandate of the Affordable Care Act, which required employers to provide certain birth-control coverage to employees.

The Court said yes, under RFRA a closely held for‑profit corporation can be exempt if enforcing the regulation would burden the owners’ sincerely held religious beliefs. RFRA requires the government to show a compelling interest and use the least restrictive means when a law substantially burdens religious exercise. The majority found that applying the mandate to these corporations would impose a substantial burden on the owners’ religious beliefs, and that RFRA allowed exemptions in such circumstances. In this sense, the decision recognizes a form of corporate religious rights, grounded in the ownership and beliefs of the people behind the corporation, rather than granting a broad, general religious status to the corporation itself.

This case doesn’t address other big questions about corporate power or personhood in general. It’s specifically about religious freedom as it applies to federal regulation under RFRA and whether those exemptions can extend to certain businesses based on their owners’ beliefs. Other listed cases focus on different issues altogether—Marbury v. Madison on judicial review, Brown v. Board of Education on desegregation and equal protection, Roe v. Wade on abortion rights—so they don’t fit the question’s focus.