Supreme Court's Decision in Zubik v. Burwell

Last December I wrote a loooonnnngggg post about the issues in Zubik v. Burwell, the contraceptive mandate case. This case promised to be one of the most significant decisions of the Supreme Court's 2015-2016 term. Today, the case closed softly, in what the media is calling a "compromise" resolution. (Today's decision of the Court in Zubic v. Burwell is available here.) But make no mistake -- the winners are employees who are now guaranteed contraceptive coverage at no cost.

2013-2014 Supreme Court Term: Court's Decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman, No. 11-965: Implications for the Birth Control Mandate Cases?

On January 14, 2014, the Supreme Court issued its decision in favor of Daimler AG (the maker of Mercedes-Benz), ruling that the federal courts in California lacked personal jurisdiction over Daimler to adjudicate claims for human rights violations arising in Argentina. The ruling of the Court may have implications for the birth control mandate cases pending before the Court in Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties. The Court's slip opinion in Daimler AG v. Bauman is available here.

Corporations Are Persons -- But They Are Not Citizens Nor Do They Have Souls

This year in the birth control mandate cases the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the religious liberty claims of two for-profit business corporations: Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties. This represents an opportunity for the Court to correct the grave error it made in the Citizens United case where it ruled that business corporations have a constitutional right to expend money on behalf of candidates for political office as if they were citizens. For profit corporations are persons, but they are not citizens who have the right to participate in democratic elections for office, nor do they have souls and the consequent right to exercise religion.