Burwell V. Hobby Lobby Case Study

I. Introduction The United States is founded on the concept of Liberty. As expressed in the Constitution, all United States citizens are entitled to the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These values have been endlessly challenged throughout history in an attempt to determine where freedom should end and where government regulation might begin. The Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Supreme Court Decision sought to answer a wildly asked question; Do for-profit corporations possess religious rights (Corbin)? This case, which took place in 2013-2014, evidenced the viable conflict between the Affordable Care Act of 2010 and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. The outcome of the case was a 5-4 ruling in favor of Hobby Lobby stores (Morgan). This ruling essentially included for-profit corporations within

The Hobby Lobby Corporation is based in Oklahoma where it is recognized as a for-profit organization under state law (Morgan). These stores are owned by the Greens, a Christian family. The Greens openly run the Hobby Lobby Stores with religious motive, one example of this being the closure of all stores on Sundays ("Burwell v. Hobby Lobby"). In fact, each Green family member had initially signed a pledge stating that they would operate all stores in conformity with the family's Christian ideals (Morgan). After the passage of the ACA, the Greens sued the United States Government, therefore bringing this case against the Department of Health and Human Services and its secretary, Sylvia Burwell. The Greens argued that following the contraceptive mandate of the ACA would violate their religious ideals ("Burwell v. Hobby Lobby"). More specifically, the Greens felt it would violate their genuine belief that human life begins at the moment of conception (Morgan). Hence, the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby case was