Search for: "Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. " Results 221 - 240 of 262
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Dec 2017, 5:00 pm by Ad Law Defense
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., No. [read post]
19 Nov 2013, 7:04 pm by Mary Pat Dwyer
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. 13-354Issue: Whether The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. [read post]
16 Aug 2015, 9:01 pm by Ronald D. Rotunda
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (2014), the Supreme Court held that a regulation of Health and Human Services could not force Hobby Lobby to pay for abortifacients to give to its employees. [read post]
24 Apr 2018, 7:00 am by Jonathan H. Adler
May foreign corporations be held liable for alleged violations of international law in U.S. courts under the Alien Tort Statute? [read post]
25 Nov 2012, 10:28 pm by Leland E. Beck
  Two more decisions in the ongoing HHS ACA contraceptive regulations soap opera: Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 10:04 am by Josh Blackman
Hobby Lobby Stores (2014): "It seems to me appropriate, in joining the Court's opinion, to add these few remarks. [read post]
3 Oct 2014, 4:40 am by Robin Shea
EDT, Thursday, October 9, will be on Hobby Lobby and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 2:56 pm by John Elwood
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., and Wheaton College v. [read post]
16 May 2016, 2:33 pm by Erin Morrow Hawley
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. in particular, suggests that the most important factor of the substantial-burden analysis is the religious adherents’ own view of the imposed burden. [read post]
18 Jun 2016, 6:17 am by Stephen Wermiel
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., came on the last day of the Term, June 30, upholding an opt-out for employer-provided contraception coverage for closely held companies with religious objections. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 6:03 pm by Cynthia L. Hackerott
In the wake of last month’s Supreme Court ruling in Burwell v Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc — where the Court held that the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive coverage regulations violate the religious rights of closely held private corporations — some advocates feared that the new EO might contain a sweeping religious exemption. [read post]