The headline is a bit misleading. The question the Supreme Court has chosen to address is whether a corporation has Constitutional rights under the religious freedom clause of the First Amendment. The Court has already held that corporations have rights under the free speech segment of the First Amendment, but it’s a little easier to understant how a corporation, in its own name, can engage in speech;a little harder to understand how a corporation in its own name can engage in religious observance. Of course, though Democrats don’t know this, corporations are owned by human beings, and — though Democrats don’t know this either — human beings CAN meaningfully engage in religious observance. But the line between the corporation and its human owners is the question before the Supreme Court in this case.
200 years ago the SCOTUS decided that a corporation was a “person” with the rights of a person, to own, contract, sell,rent buy etc. IOW do all the things that a human person could do in a legal sense. For them to decide otherwise now they would have to do a super Roberts reversal. IMHO they will find a way to do it.
. . . the Supreme Court upheld ObamaCare as a constitutional form of taxation . . .
ObamaCare is intaxicating.