[deadrock]

It was a poorly written post of mine. It is about the two other judges on the panel whodisagreed with parts of the ruling and said the rights of religious people do not extend to the companies they own that appear contradicting.

[Cboldt]

-- It is about the two other judges on the panel who disagreed with parts of the ruling and said the rights of religious people do not extend to the companies they own that appear contradicting. --

I just skimmed the opinion. Brown says that companies have no religious rights, but Gilardi's as living breathing human beings do; and their rights are offended and RFRA gives them a remedy. The judge that agreed with the judgment (which I see as a totally hollow and worthless win, the company has to comply with the law) said the company/individual distinction is nonsense in this case, as the company is an S-Corp. The dissenter says that law always trumps religion, and cites the Reynolds case against polygamy as authority.