The whole point of incorporating is to shield the individuals who run the corporations and/or own it from legal liability and financial risk from what the corporation does.
that's what stuck out for me also. commentary i've read on the case emphasizes that it's the owners' religious rights that are impinged on. i wonder if standing on those rights will give someone an opening to say they're not really acting as a corporation at all-- and thus are personally liable for the company's deeds and debts. i imagine there will be an incentive for some ambitious lawyer to find out.
i also keep seeing them referred to as a "closely held" corporation, which presumably is relevant somehow. has the supreme court just changed the definition of closely held corporations?
That anyone would claim a religious objection to contraception seems like a ridiculous anachronism
that women still need permission from their employers to use their chosen form of of contraception-- that the employers are involved in any way-- seems bizarre to me. but it's an artifact of the weird ways we have chosen to structure healthcare... and this whole mess is part of our ongoing attempt to change those weird ways. i sympathize with the cries to use this as a reason to finally make hormonal birth control over-the-counter. but there are still methods that doesn't help for.
no subject
that's what stuck out for me also. commentary i've read on the case emphasizes that it's the owners' religious rights that are impinged on. i wonder if standing on those rights will give someone an opening to say they're not really acting as a corporation at all-- and thus are personally liable for the company's deeds and debts. i imagine there will be an incentive for some ambitious lawyer to find out.
i also keep seeing them referred to as a "closely held" corporation, which presumably is relevant somehow. has the supreme court just changed the definition of closely held corporations?
That anyone would claim a religious objection to contraception seems like a ridiculous anachronism
that women still need permission from their employers to use their chosen form of of contraception-- that the employers are involved in any way-- seems bizarre to me. but it's an artifact of the weird ways we have chosen to structure healthcare... and this whole mess is part of our ongoing attempt to change those weird ways. i sympathize with the cries to use this as a reason to finally make hormonal birth control over-the-counter. but there are still methods that doesn't help for.