Law Commons^™

Religious Freedom & Closely Held Corporations: The Hobby Lobby Case & Its Ethical Implications, Corey A. Ciocchetti

Corey A Ciocchetti

Hobby Lobby and its quest for religious freedom captured the attention of a nation for a few moments in late June 2014. The country homed in on the Supreme Court as the justices weighed the rights of an incorporated, profit-making entity run by devout individuals that objected to particular entitlements granted to women under the Affordable Care Act. The case raised important legal issues such as whether the law allows for-profit corporations to exercise religion (yes!) and whether protection for religious freedom trumps the rights of third parties to cost free preventive care (sort of!). The Supreme Court’s decision also …

Against Regulatory Displacement: An Institutional Analysis Of Financial Crises, Jonathan C. Lipson

Jonathan C. Lipson

This paper uses “institutional analysis”—the study of the relative capacities of markets, courts, and regulators—to make three claims about financial crises.

First, financial crises are increasingly a problem of “regulatory displacement.” Through the ad hoc rescues of 2008 and the Dodd-Frank reforms of 2010, regulators displace market and judicial processes that ordinarily prevent financial distress from becoming financial crises. Because regulators are vulnerable to capture by large financial services firms, however, they cannot address the pathologies that create crises: market concentration and complexity. Indeed, regulators may inadvertently aggravate these conditions through resolution tactics that consolidate firms, and the volume and …

Corporations And Religious Freedom: Hobby Lobby Stores - A Missed Opportunity To Reconcile A Flawed Law With A Flawed Health Care System, Matthew A. Melone

Matthew A. Melone

On June 30, 2014, the Supreme Court held, in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., that the requirement imposed on employer group health insurance plans to provide coverage for certain contraceptives unduly burdened the free exercise rights of three closely-held corporations in violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 ( RFRA ). The contraception mandate was imposed by regulations implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, itself a very controversial piece of legislation a part of which was upheld recently by the Court in a perhaps a case more controversial than Hobby Lobby Stores. RFRA was enacted …

State “Subsidies” And Unnecessary Public Funding: The Texas Legislature’S Successful Restriction Of Constitutional Rights In Department Of Texas V. Texas Lottery Commission, Tyler A. Dever Ms.

Tyler A Dever Ms.

This Note argues that the Act’s political advocacy restrictions are unconstitutional as applied to the Plaintiffs in Texas Lottery. This Note discusses government subsidies, occupational licenses, and the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions. It then analyzes the charitable organizations’ First Amendment rights in light of the challenged Act. Although this Note argues against the majority’s upholding of the Act, it will also present flaws in the plaintiffs’ argument for injunction and explain why the court may have ruled in favor of the state.

The Evolution Of The Digital Millennium Copyright Act; Changing Interpretations Of The Dmca And Future Implications For Copyright Holders, Hillary A. Henderson

Hillary A Henderson

Copyright law rewards an artificial monopoly to individual authors for their creations. This reward is based on the belief that, by granting authors the exclusive right to reproduce their works, they receive an incentive and means to create, which in turn advances the welfare of the general public by “promoting the progress of science and useful arts.” Copyright protection subsists . . . in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or …

The Uneasy Relationship Of Hobby Lobby, Conestoga Wood, The Affordable Care Act, And The Corporate Person: How A Historical Myth Continues To Bedevil The Legal System, Malcolm J. Harkins Iii

Malcolm J Harkins III

On November 26, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear two cases — Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius — challenging the validity of the Affordable Care Act’s (“ACA”) mandate that employer-sponsored health plans cover all FDA-approved contraceptives (the “Contraceptive Mandate”). In each case, closely held plaintiff corporations contend that the Contraceptive Mandate illegally infringed upon the corporations’ freedom to exercise religion.

The problem confronting the Supreme Court as it takes up the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood cases is that the concept of corporate personhood did not develop gradually …