Title: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. - Case Summary and Case Brief
Headings: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
Case Summary of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.:
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. Case Brief
Statement of the Facts:
Procedural History:
Issue and Holding:
Judgment:
Rule of Law or Legal Principle Applied:
Reasoning:
Concurring and Dissenting Opinions:
Concurring Opinion (Kennedy):
Dissenting Opinion (Ginsburg):
Dissenting Opinion (Breyer & Kagan):
Significance:
Student Resources:

Content: The U.S. Supreme Court agreed with the Tenth Circuit that for-profit companies have the right to freely exercise their religion. Therefore, for-profit companies do not have to follow the government’s contraceptive requirement. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. Case Brief
Statement of the Facts: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) required employers to provide insurance coverage for contraceptives to their employees. In enforcing the ACA, the Department of Health and Human Services exempted certain organizations – namely religious non-profit organizations – from the contraceptive requirement. David Green is the founder of Hobby Lobby Stores; Green’s son Mart operated Mardel Christian and Educational Supply; and the Hahn family owned Conestoga Wood Specialties. Those three corporate owners had a religious objection to abortion and contraceptives. Therefore, they sued the federal government, claiming that they should not be forced to provide coverage for contraceptives to their employees because they – the corporation owners – had a religious objection.