abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

22 Jul 2014

Author:
Alexandra Brodsky & Elizabeth Deutsch, in Bloomberg View

Academics argue US Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision over contraception coverage violates anti-discrimination law

"How Civil-Rights Law Could Overturn Hobby Lobby", 21 Jul 2014

In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, an all-male U.S. Supreme Court majority granted exemptions to "closely held corporations" that refuse to offer contraceptive coverage in employee health plans...Employers who single out contraceptives as undeserving of coverage don't only violate ethical expectations of gender equality. They also violate federal anti-discrimination law...By ignoring the discriminatory aspects of the denials, the Hobby Lobby majority was able to argue that the government's interest in protecting contraceptive access could not sustain the Religious Freedom Restoration Act challenge mounted by the objecting corporations...It's important to call the denial of contraceptive coverage what it is: illegal discrimination. The policies in question in Hobby Lobby are not merely the stuff of culture wars. They discriminate against women in violation of a civil-rights law passed half a century ago.