Businesses have religious liberty....

[John Galt]

[Kane]

Did the court, at any point, specify what constitutes a "closely held corporation?" Are they just using the IRS definition? And if so, how doesn't that violate equality under the law (If each corporation is to be seen as a person)? Aside from that, doesn't this provide the precedent for future recriminations against other forms of healthcare? If they don't comport with the company's religious beliefs? How many corporations are about to go Amish?

[eynon81]

[exploited]

[eynon81]

[John Galt]

[Kane]

Well the ruling is kinda terrible. They upheld the mandatory healthcare provision in an earlier case but are here carving out specific exemptions. Aside from that, these exemptions are wholly religious as all scientific evidence seems to indicate there are real health concerns that are effectively addressed by these contraceptives...

The court took the moment to carve out this specific exemption due to a failure of the legislation to correctly identify the items as prurient to general healthcare. As necessary to effect the courts prior ruling on the mandate and provisions contained therein. It seems the court did this merely because it could...and as Ginsburg noted, had opened a vast chasm of possibilities that will have to be addressed by the court.

[Kane]

[eynon81]