Skip to main content
Article
The Aftermath of Hobby Lobby: HSAs and HRAs as the Least Restrictive Means
Rutgers Law Record
  • Edward A. Zelinsky, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
Publication Date
1-1-2014
Abstract

In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., the United States Supreme Court held that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) does not require closely-held corporations’ employer-sponsored medical plans to provide forms of contraception that shareholders of such corporations object to on religious grounds. The question now raised is how the President, Congress, and the departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Treasury and Labor, ought to respond to the Hobby Lobby decision.

Publisher
Rutgers Law School
Keywords
  • Contraception,
  • Reproductive Technology,
  • Courts,
  • First Amendment,
  • Plaintiffs,
  • Legal Practice and Procedure,
  • Religion and the Law
Disciplines
Citation Information
Edward A. Zelinsky. "The Aftermath of Hobby Lobby: HSAs and HRAs as the Least Restrictive Means" Rutgers Law Record Vol. 42 (2014) p. 110
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/edward-zelinsky/446/