Money, Sex, and Religion — The Supreme Court's ACA Sequel

In Hobby Lobby, the Supreme Court ruled that the ACA burdens the exercise of religion by imposing fines if a company does not provide insurance coverage for all FDA-approved contraception. The authors argue that this undermines the ACA's goal of universal access to health care. The Supreme Court decision in the Hobby Lobby case is in many ways a sequel to the Court's 2012 decision on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). 1 , 2 Like the 2012 case, the decision was decided by a 5-to-4 vote, but in the initial ACA decision, Chief Justice John Roberts acted to “save” the ACA. 3 Not this time. Then the watchword was “broccoli,” as in forcing people to eat it; this time it is abortion, as in forcing employers to pay for it. To simplify, the choice facing the Court in the Hobby Lobby case was whether to . . .