The government burdens the businesses exercise of religion by forcing them to either renounce their religious beliefs or pay hundreds of millions of dollars in fines each year.

The law does not ask courts to pretend that corporations are robots because corporations are owned and operated by people.

RFRA says, for all of us, that religious freedom matters, that it matters to policy winners and losers alike, and that if we can accommodate religious believers’ practices and objections, then we should.

The best of our legal heritage favors recognition of religious freedom exercised by family-run businesses and closely held companies.

One of the most important cases of the year before the Supreme Court is asking the question whether a for-profit corporation is categorically excluded from protection for free exercise of religion under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

No matter how the government spins the issues and tries to frame the semantics, the science, history, and tradition are on the side of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga.

Does running a business mean you have to silence your conscience? Next month, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case that will decide that question.

The First Amendment’s language on freedom of religion could not be more clear: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

The government can’t force individuals to forfeit their free exercise rights when they incorporate a business…

Does the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) entitle a for-profit corporation to an exemption from the requirement of providing employees with health coverage that includes contraception, on the ground that the owners of the corporation have religious objections to providing such coverage?