In light of the Supreme Court hearing oral argument today in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., we are excited to release an early online-only version of RFRA Exemptions from the Contraception Mandate: An Unconstitutional Accommodation of Religion, by Frederick Mark Gedicks and Rebecca G. Van Tassell.  In Hobby Lobby, the Court will be entertaining arguments about whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act allows a for-profit corporation with religious objections to deny its employees health coverage for contraceptives that they would otherwise be entitled to through the Affordable Care Act.  Here, Gedicks and Van Tassell introduce the Establishment Clause as a limitation on RFRA, as the clause prohibits shifting the cost of religious observance to third parties.  Even though the government has not raised this issue in briefs, this important article highlights the key role that the Establishment Clause should play in resolving Hobby Lobby’s claims.

Read the article here!

Written by

The Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review (CR-CL) is the nation’s leading progressive law journal. Founded in 1966 as an instrument to advance personal freedoms and human dignities, CR-CL seeks to catalyze progressive thought and dialogue through publishing innovative legal scholarship and from various perspectives and in diverse fields of study.

Latest comment


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.