Nos. 13-354, 13-356.

134 S.Ct. 2751 (2014)

189 L.Ed.2d 675

Sylvia BURWELL, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al., Petitioners v. HOBBY LOBBY STORES, INC., et al. Conestoga Wood Specialties Corporation et al., Petitioners v. Sylvia Burwell, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al.

Supreme Court of United States.

Decided June 30, 2014.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Paul D. Clement , Washington, DC, for the private parties.

Donald B. Verrilli, Jr. , Solicitor General, for the federal government.

Paul D. Clement , Michael H. McGinley , Bancroft PLLC, Washington, DC, Peter M. Dobelbower , General Counsel and Chief Legal Officer, Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., Oklahoma City, OK, S. Kyle Duncan , Counsel of Record, Eric C. Rassbach , Luke W. Goodrich , Hannah C. Smith , Mark L. Rienzi , Lori H. Windham , Adele Auxier Keim , The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Washington, DC, Joshua D. Hawley , University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, counsel for Respondents.

Donald B. Verrilli, Jr. , Solicitor General, Counsel of Record, Stuart F. Delery , Assistant Attorney General, Ian Heath Gershengorn , Edwin S. Kneedler , Deputy Solicitors General, Joseph R. Palmore , Assistant to the Solicitor General, Mark B. Stern , Alisa B. Klein , Washington, DC, for Petitioners.

Jordan W. Lorence , Steven H. Aden , Gregory S. Baylor , Matthew S. Bowman , Alliance Defending Freedom, Washington, DC, David A. Cortman , Counsel of Record, Kevin H. Theriot , Rory T. Gray , Alliance Defending Freedom, Lawrenceville, GA, Charles W. Proctor, III , Law Offices of Proctor, Lindsay & Dixon, Chadds Ford, PA, Randall L. Wenger , Independence Law Center, Harrisburg, PA, for Petitioners Conestoga Wood Specialties Corporation et al.

Justice ALITO delivered the opinion of the Court.

We must decide in these cases whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), 107 Stat. 1488, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb et seq., permits the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to demand that three closely held corporations provide health-insurance coverage for methods of contraception that violate the sincerely held religious beliefs...


Uncompromising quality. Enduring impact.
Your support ensures a bright future for independent legal reporting.

As you are aware we have offered this as a free subscription over the past years and we have now made it a paid service.Look forward to your continued patronage.



Read it with your Leagle account.
Sign in to continue

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases