The February 4, 2014, Slate magazine article “Silence Inc. What side has corporate America taken in the Hobby Lobby challenge?“ highlights an amicus curiae brief to which Professor Daniel J.H. Greenwood contributed and joined.
The article, by David H. Gans, examines corporations’ refusal to support two cases before the Supreme Court challenging the Affordable Care Act’s requirement that employer health plans cover the full range of FDA–approved contraceptives for their employees.
Describing the brief, Gans writes, “[A] group of corporate law scholars … argued that Hobby Lobby’s argument would eviscerate the fabric of corporate law, undercutting the corporate veil that protects owners and shareholders from liability for the actions of the corporation. Filed on behalf of some of the nation’s most-well-respected corporate law scholars, the brief urges the justices to reject Hobby Lobby’s invitation to ascribe the religious views of Hobby Lobby’s individual owners to the corporation itself.”