![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/433\/2014\/07\/SCOTUS3-articleLarge.jpg\" "\\"SCOTUS3-articleLarge\\"")
<\/a>What is Hobby Lobby?<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0 A chain of arts and crafts stores. Based in Oklahoma City. Privately held and has about 578 stores throughout the US. It has over 23,000 employees and it is one of the largest privately held companies in the country.<\/p>\n Why did Hobby Lobby Sue?<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0 The store\u2019s owners are upset with part of the Affordable Care Act that has to do with covering contraceptives with insurance.<\/p>\n According to this article from the Washington Pos<\/a>t, the owners \u201cdon\u2019t have a problem with offering insurance that covers most forms of birth control, but they aren\u2019t willing to cover emergency contraceptives \u2014 like Plan B or ella \u2014 or IUDs.\u201d<\/p>\n What\u2019s this Got to do with Religious Freedom?\u00a0<\/strong><\/span> According to the Post<\/a>, \u201cHobby Lobby contends its \u2018religious beliefs prohibit them from providing health coverage for contraceptive drugs and devices that end human life after conception.\u2019<\/p>\n What is the broader question here?<\/strong><\/span> Do profit-making companies have a right to religious freedom under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act? \u00a0Or, as the Religion News Service notes<\/a>, \u201ccan a corporation be said to have religious practices?\u201d<\/p>\n What is the Religious Freedom Restoration Act<\/strong><\/span>: \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0This 1993 Act (signed by President Clinton) restricts the government from curbing your religious freedom UNLESS<\/span> it has \u201ca compelling reason that not doing so would keep it from governing properly.\u201d And, notes the Religion News Service, \u201cit must do so in the least intrusive way possible.\u201d<\/p>\n What did the Supreme Court Decide?<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>The decision was not unanimous. It was 5-4 and it sided with Hobby Lobby. Here\u2019s how the New York Times summed it up<\/a>: \u201cThe court ruled that corporations controlled by religious families cannot be required to pay for contraception coverage for their female workers.\u201d<\/p>\n What\u2019s the Big Deal?<\/strong><\/span> According to the Religion News Service<\/a>, it \u201cmeans the courts might see a lot more challenges from for-profit corporations to laws they feel conflict with their owners\u2019 religious beliefs.\u201d<\/p>\n \u00a0Which\u00a0Justices\u00a0Supported Hobby Lobby?<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n What did the Justices Who Dissented Say?<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> \u00a0Justice Ginsburg said, \u00a0according to the NY Time<\/a>s, \u201cThe court\u2019s expansive notion of corporate personhood, invites for-profit entities to seek religion-based exemptions from regulations they deem offensive to their faiths.\u201d<\/p>\n Hip Hughes explains the Court decision in this entertaining clip. Hughes made \u00a0a series of documentaries for US History too.<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n