SCOTUSblog » Academic Round-up

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Can Corporations Really Have 1st Amendment Protections for Religion?



First Amendment jurisprudence gets more bizarre by the month under the current Supreme Court. First, in its Citizens United decision, the Court found that corporations have free speech rights. The conclusion there means not just that corporations can express opinions in ordinary situations, but that the government must protect such expression except under the most extraordinary circumstances. We all have an obligation to corporations in this scheme of things.

Now the Court appears to be open to the idea that corporations have religious rights, too.

We're not talking here about the right of individuals who own companies, but the companies themselves. The company at issue in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby wants to refuse to pay for any insurance that would allow an employee to be reimbursed for contraception like IUD's. The owners say that they object to such measures on religious grounds, and that the Affordable Care Act would therefore violate their rights by providing such insurance.

Now, what if they made the same claim about vaccinations? That is, not only do the owners not want to be vaccinated or have their children vaccinated, but they do not want to be required to pay for insurance that would allow their employees to be vaccinated. Under this reasoning, they could claim religious exemption from almost any regulation simply by applying a twice-removed impact on them.

Note that the owners still want to distinguish themselves from their company for the purposes of liability and taxes, but not when it comes to the 1st Amendment.

Just like the recent Arizona law about religious rights in hiring, this argument is nonsense. If the First Amendment can be made to mean everything, it is made to mean nothing. It's dangerous and foolish to water our rights down like this.

No comments: