The Purpose Driven Sentence – Rick Warren Exposes the Flaw in Hobby Lobby’s Challenge to the ACA

In an op-ed in Saturday’s Washington Post, Pastor Rick Warren claims that the contraception mandate of the Affordable Care Act violates the religious freedom of the Green family that owns the multibillion-dollar, for-profit corporation called Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.  Much has been written about why this is not so (including here by my colleague David Gans), but now Warren’s op-ed itself unwittingly exposes the gaping hole in the Greens’ legal theory.   According to Warren:

“Two years ago, the Greens’ commitment to practicing their religious convictions in their family business required that they object to just a few of the contraceptives the government requires providing to employees under the Affordable Care Act.”

“The government requires providing”?  Requires of whom?  Rather awkward writing by a best-selling author.  A more clearly written sentence explaining what the ACA actually does would say:

“Two years ago, the Greens’ commitment to practicing their religious convictions in their family business required that they object to just a few of the contraceptives the government requires that Hobby Lobby provide to its employees under its group health insurance plan.”

Warren’s carefully crafted sentence slides right over the fact that the ACA imposes no legal obligations on the Greens themselves, only on the corporate entity Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.  

This is hardly a distinction without a difference.  Individuals who own corporations are given many privileges that individuals running an unincorporated business simply do not enjoy, such as immunity from personal liability for the debts and obligations of the business, which is why so many business owners choose to incorporate.  

The Greens themselves made that choice and elected to incorporate Hobby Lobby Stores.   Now, however, they would like Hobby Lobby to enjoy the privileges of incorporation but without all of the obligations imposed on other for-profit corporations.  That seems a pretty clear sentence to write.  

More from

Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Williams v. Huner

In Williams v. Huner, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is considering whether a Pennsylvania prison’s failure to provide a prisoner with rigid neck and wrist braces and effective pain medication violated...
Environmental Protection
October 5, 2026

CAC Release: To Escape Financial Liability for Global Warming Harms, Oil and Gas Companies Present Supreme Court with a Result in Search of a Rationale

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Suncor Energy...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Rule of Law
October 5, 2026

Open Forum, Part 1

CSPAN's Washington Journal
CAC President Elizabeth Wydra joined CSPAN’s Washington Journal to discuss the upcoming term at the...
Rule of Law
October 2, 2026

Guns, voting and immigration on deck for Supreme Court

Roll Call
CAC Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod discussed the coming Supreme Court term in Roll Call. Read...
Corporate Accountability
October 2, 2026

Corporations Fared Even Better Than President Trump in the Supreme Court’s Prior Term, and the Upcoming Term Provides More Opportunities for Corporate Wins

WASHINGTON, DC – With the start of the new Supreme Court term on Monday, the...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Corporate Accountability
October 2, 2026

Corporations Outdo Even President Trump in the Most Recent Supreme Court Term (2025–2026 Term)

After a Supreme Court term that gave corporations everything they wanted in the most important...
By: Brian R. Frazelle