The Liberal Case for Hobby Lobby

47 Pages Posted: 23 Oct 2014 Last revised: 1 Oct 2015

See all articles by Brett McDonnell

Brett McDonnell

University of Minnesota Law School

Date Written: October 22, 2014

Abstract

The recent Supreme Court decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. has stirred strong objections from political liberals. This article argues that those objections are unwarranted, and that the Court’s opinion reflects core liberal values. The decision has two main parts, and liberal objections to each part are misguided.

In the first part, the Court held that in some circumstances for-profit corporations committed to religious goals may invoke the religious liberty protection of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Liberals have treated this as an appalling and/or humorous extension of rights which should apply only to humans. However, the Court’s decision rightly recognizes that corporations can and sometimes do pursue goals other than shareholder profits. This fits well with the stress on corporate social responsibility one finds in progressive corporate law scholarship such as the author’s. Where religious beliefs shape a corporation’s purposes, the protections of RFRA may rightly apply. The article suggests a detailed framework for determining when particular corporations are engaged in the exercise of religion, looking to both organizational and ownership dimensions of commitment to religion. This framework clarifies the somewhat sketchy analysis of the Court and more firmly roots that analysis in corporate law and theory.

In the second part of the opinion, the Court held that the contraceptive mandate of the Affordable Care Act substantially burdens the religious exercise of employers, and that the mandate is not the least restrictive means of achieving a compelling governmental objective. Liberals fear that this holding aggressively extends the protection of RFRA while undermining the compelling goal of the contraceptive mandate. The article argues that the holding is quite nuanced and limited, and that much liberal reaction reflects discomfort with RFRA itself. That is a shame, as creating a diverse society where persons and groups with differing beliefs are able to co-exist should be a core liberal commitment. The article suggests that liberals may have lost sight of this commitment as the groups invoking RFRA’s protection have shifted from social outcasts to more mainstream religious conservatives. That may explain, but does not justify, liberal opposition to Hobby Lobby.

Keywords: Hobby Lobby, corporate purpose, corporate social responsibility, free exercise, Religious Freedom Restoration Act

JEL Classification: D21, G30, K22, L21, M14

Suggested Citation

McDonnell, Brett H., The Liberal Case for Hobby Lobby (October 22, 2014). Arizona Law Review, Vol. 57, 2015; Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 14-39. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2513380 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2513380

Brett H. McDonnell (Contact Author)

University of Minnesota Law School ( email )

229 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
United States
612-625-1373 (Phone)

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
179
Abstract Views
2,111
rank
170,874
PlumX Metrics