How did Justice Ginsburg think the decision could affect employees who did not share their employers’ religious beliefs?

In her dissenting opinion for Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued that the court’s decision failed to account for the disadvantages that religion-based exemptions impose on third parties.1

She contended that allowing for-profit corporations to opt out of legal requirements based on the religious beliefs of their owners would override the significant interests of employees and their covered dependents. Specifically, she warned that the ruling would deny "legions of women" who do not share their employers' religious views access to contraceptive coverage that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) was intended to secure.1

Justice Ginsburg emphasized that the court's decision ignored the harm caused to these individuals, asserting that the law should not permit employers to impose their personal religious convictions upon their workforce in a way that restricts access to federally mandated health benefits.1