“Their abjection is to mandated funding for abortion and infanticide. Not potential side effects of some medications.”
True, BUT they also specifically object to insurance coverage for those two specific ergs, which they provided previously. I don’t think it matters (companies can change their minds just like anyone else), but something like this just may be enough to sway a “centrist” guy like Justice Kennedy - he may look at this and say that it suggests that Hobby Lobby’s religious belief is “insincere,” or something like that. Gives him an easy way to decide the case without having to decide the religious liberty issue.
He can't change the stipulated facts. There is a stipulation the Hobby Lobby has a sincere religious objection. The ruling must be based on this FACT.
The SCOTUS does not decide factual issues. The facts must be stipulated before the appeal is filed. If there is a dispute on the facts, then the court has no jurisdiction to take the case. They can only rule on the law. They don't decide the facts.