Why did Hobby Lobby’s owners argue that the contraceptive mandate violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act?

The owners of Hobby Lobby argued that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) contraceptive mandate violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) because it imposed a "substantial burden" on their exercise of religion.1

The owners, who are Christian, believed that four of the 20 FDA-approved contraceptive methods were abortifacients. Consequently, they argued that providing insurance coverage for these specific methods would be equivalent to facilitating abortion, which conflicted with their religious tenets.1

Under the RFRA, the government is prohibited from substantially burdening a person's exercise of religion unless the regulation is the "least restrictive means" of furthering a "compelling governmental interest". The owners contended that because the government imposed significant financial penalties—$100 per day per affected employee—on companies that failed to provide the mandated coverage, the regulation forced them to choose between violating their religious beliefs or facing severe economic consequences. The Supreme Court ultimately agreed, ruling that closely held for-profit corporations are "persons" under the RFRA and can exercise religion.123