Lecture slides from "Introduction to Religious Studies" at the University of Alabama. Written by Prof. Michael J. Altman

1. Religious Corporations
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby

2. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby
• Health and Human Services mandates
that employers cover 20 FDA approved
methods of contraception
• The Green family, owners of Hobby Lobby,
believes 4 of the methods violate their
religious beliefs.
• Does the HHS mandate violate Hobby
Lobby’s religious freedom?

3. The Questions:
• Does a corporation have religious
freedom?
• How do you distinguish a corporations
“religious beliefs?”
• What are the limits of religious freedom?

4. The Legal History
1. Employment Division v. Smith
2. Religious Freedom Restoration Act
3. Citizens United v. Federal Election
Commission

5. Employment Division v. Smith
(1990)
• Alfred Smith and Galen Black members of
Native American Church
• Fired for their use of peyote in religious
rituals and denied unemployment.
• Peyote was illegal in Oregon.
• They sued for unemployment because
they were fired for religious exercise.

6. Employment Division v. Smith
Should illegal sacramental drug use (peyote)
be protected by the free exercise clause?
What would Rawls/Habermas say?

7. Employment Division v. Smith
“"It is a permissible reading of the [free exercise
clause]...to say that if prohibiting the exercise of religion
is not the object of the [law] but merely the incidental
effect of a generally applicable and otherwise valid
provision, the First Amendment has not been
offended....To make an individual's obligation to obey
such a law contingent upon the law's coincidence with
his religious beliefs, except where the State's interest is
'compelling' - permitting him, by virtue of his beliefs, 'to
become a law unto himself,' contradicts both
constitutional tradition and common sense.' To adopt a
true 'compelling interest' requirement for laws that affect
religious practice would lead towards anarchy.”

8. Employment Division v. Smith
• Law may prohibit religious exercise if the
prohibition is incidental and not the goal of
the law.
• To make exceptions would lead to every
citizen “a law unto himself” (Reynolds).
• The solution is legislation providing
exemptions.

9. Federal Religious Freedom
Restoration Act (1993)
Government shall not substantially burden a
person’s exercise of religion even if the
burden results from a rule of general
applicability.
Exceptions:
1. “compelling governmental interest”
2. “the least restrictive means”

10. Citizens United v. Federal Election
Commission (2010)
• SCTOUS ruled that corporations have
First Amendment rights to free speech.
• Strengthened idea that corporations have
legal rights of “persons.”

11. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby
• Health and Human Services mandates
that employers cover 20 FDA approved
methods of contraception
• The Green family, owners of Hobby Lobby,
believes 4 of the methods violate their
religious beliefs.
• Does the HHS mandate violate Hobby
Lobby’s religious freedom?

12. Your turn to rule.
• Does the government have a “compelling
interest?”
• Is it the “least restrictive means?”
• Does Hobby Lobby have freedom of
exercise rights as a “person?”
• What’s your ruling?

13. Corporations & Religious Belief
“Throughout the summer—and throughout the
court’s longer history—religion has become
fundamentally a matter of belief and faith. What
a person does with her body because of belief
and faith is protected, but the real essence of
religion is what’s going on in her head and her
heart. Religious expression is an outgrowth, a
second-order occurrence stemming from
religious belief. The mind and the heart are
primary; the body is secondary.”