I'm under no illusion that such things could possibly have any influence on
the Court at this late date (majority opinions having been in circulation
for at least two weeks now), but thought it might be worth posting two
further entries on Hobby Lobby, in anticipation of the decision:
One issue underlying Marty's very effectively presented argument about the
absence of an employer mandate is what counts as the kind of substantial burden
that warrants legal attention. Marty suggests that plaintiffs in Hobby Lobby
need specific allegations and ultimately some direct proof to
Thanks for that extremely thoughtful response, Alan.
I think you're onto something important: I imagine that even if the SP
report is correct, and many employers will drop their health care plans in
the coming years, there is a definite first mover phenomenon at work --
that is to say, the main
I'm not sure that I understand your argument, Marty. Let me play it out to see
if I have it right. As you suggest an employer might be wary of dropping the
health care plans because of the uncertainties and potential risks of doing so.
Let's say that two employers have the same religious
