Hobby Lobby decision extends dangerous precedent
The Supreme Court’s decision this morning saying Hobby Lobby does not have to provide contraceptive coverage to its employees because doing so violates the owners’ religious beliefs came as no surprise. After its Citizens United ruling that corporations are essentially people, this one was a foregone conclusion.
I won’t repeat all the well-known pro and con arguments in this case. But I do want to pass along one compelling observation I came across this morning in a Think Progress story entitled “Why Today’s Hobby Lobby Decision Actually Hurts People Of Faith.” It quotes David Gushee, an evangelical Christian professor:
“One way to look at it is this: The whole point of establishing a corporation is to create an entity separate from oneself to limit legal liability,” he writes. “Therefore, Hobby Lobby is asking for special protections/liability limits that only a corporation can get on the one hand, and special protections that only individuals, churches and religious organizations get, on the other. It seems awfully dangerous to allow corporations to have it both ways.“
Indeed it does. And yet with both Citizens United and Hobby Lobby, the Supreme Court has done exactly that — allowed corporations to have it both ways.
Brace yourself for many more corporations wanting to have it both ways.
*Note how far from the building the demonstrators are standing. In an infuriating bit of irony, the court imposes a protective buffer zone in front of its own building, a protection it was unwilling to afford the women of Massachusetts.
And in case you missed it: