| noname2200 said:
Yes, by opting not to provide any health care plan at all.
Was it? I'm increasingly thinking I need to read this thing, because at the moment I have no idea what the legal logic being employed here might be. Being closely-held shouldn't make any difference that I can think of... |
In the real world of human biases, it was likely that this was the cost to get Anthony Kennedy on board with the ruling.
In the world of jurisprudence, it is because a closely-held corporation can more effectively state that the views of the corporation are the reflective of the views of its majority holders compared to a publically traded corporation. Some speculate that Hobby Lobby has effectively sold its own future up the river for this ruling, because now they can't sell stock on the NYSE without having to first relitigate this entire ordeal. Capital raises will be tricky for them in the future (not to mention the entire galaxy of bad press they brought down on themselves here).
Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.
