The following is from an editorial in The New York Times:
More than a year after it upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court has set the stage for a showdown over the law's requirement that employer health plans cover birth control. It agreed to hear two cases challenging the mandate, each brought by a secular, profit-making company seeking an exemption on religious grounds. Lower federal appellate courts have split on the question, creating a need for a decisive ruling from the Supreme Court that rejects the specious religious liberty claims.
The thoughtfully balanced law exempts houses of worship and accommodates nonprofit religious and church-affiliated organizations, like hospitals and universities. It also preserves an employee's right to make her own decisions regarding birth control.
The Supreme Court has never recognized that a secular corporation is an entity capable of engaging in religion or that owners' religious beliefs excuse noncompliance. To do so now would upset accepted principles of corporate law and set a risky precedent.
Those challenging the mandate argue it violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a 1993 law that bars the federal government from taking actions that "substantially burden a person's exercise of religion" unless the action, via the "least restrictive means," advances a compelling government interest.
The 1993 law was not intended to cover profit-making corporations; the law merely allows employees to make independent decisions about birth control.
The Supreme Court's challenge is to recognize the real assault on religious freedom here: Namely, the assertion by private businesses of an unprecedented right to impose their religious views on workers.