Why did Justice Ginsburg describe the majority decision as having startling breadth?

In her dissent for Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg described the majority decision as having "startling breadth" because it established a precedent allowing commercial enterprises—including for-profit corporations, partnerships, and sole proprietorships—to opt out of any law they deem incompatible with their religious beliefs, with the sole exception of tax laws.1

Justice Ginsburg argued that this ruling ignored the negative impact such religious exemptions impose on third parties, specifically by denying female employees access to contraceptive coverage mandated by the [PP]ACA. Furthermore, she contended that the majority’s logic was not effectively limited to closely held corporations; she warned that the decision’s expansive interpretation of corporate personhood invited for-profit entities of any size to seek exemptions from a wide range of regulations they find religiously offensive. Ultimately, she viewed the decision as a fundamental misreading of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which she argued was never intended to grant for-profit corporations the right to religious accommodation.1