Constitutional Law Reporter
Award
Menu
  • Home
  • US Constitution
  • Supreme Court Cases
  • Justices
    • Chief Supreme Court Justices
    • Current Supreme Court Justices
    • Past US Supreme Court Justices
  • American Biographies
    • General
    • Presidents
    • Vice-Presidents
    • First Ladies
    • Signers of the U.S. Constitution
    • Signers of the Declaration of Independence
    • Delegates of the U.S. Constitution
    • Misc – Great American Bios
  • Articles
    • Current Cases
    • Historical Cases
    • Impeachment
  • Videos
  • Links
Hot-Topics

October 2, 2025 | SCOTUS Holds No Minimum Contacts Required for Personal Jurisdiction Over Foreign States Under FSIA

What Do Citizens United and the Affordable Care Act Have in Common? Supreme Court Likely to Consider Next Term

The Affordable Care Act is likely headed back to the U.S. Supreme Court next term, which starts in October. While the latest round of challenges involve the law’s contraception mandate, the Court’s decision may be influenced by Citizen’s United, the Court’s controversial campaign finance ruling.

What do these cases have in common? The answer boils down to the First Amendment.

Most recently, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the contraception mandate, finding that it does not violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. In deciding Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp et al v. Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services et al., the court analyzed the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission as it applies to the First Amendment rights of corporations.

While the appeals court acknowledged that the United States has “a long history of protecting corporations’ rights to free speech,” it held that such a precedent does not exist for religious freedom.

 “We simply cannot understand how a for-profit, secular corporation – apart from its owners – can exercise religion,” Judge Robert Cowen wrote. “A holding to the contrary … would eviscerate the fundamental principle that a corporation is a legally distinct entity from its owners.”

“We are not aware of any case preceding the commencement of litigation about the Mandate, in which a for-profit, secular corporation was itself found to have free exercise rights,” the justice further explained.

Interestingly, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals reached the opposite conclusion in deciding a challenge brought by Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. After examining Citizens United, it held that corporations could assert religious rights.

The novelty of the issue and the circuit split all but guarantees the case will make it to the Supreme Court.

Previous Articles

SCOTUS Sides With Trump Administration Over NIH Grants Tied to DEI Initiatives
by DONALD SCARINCI on September 26, 2025

The U.S. Supreme Court continues to issue emergency orders involving legal challenges to policy cha...

Read More
SCOTUS Rejects Challenge to South Carolina’s Exclusion of Planned Parenthood from State Medicaid Program
by DONALD SCARINCI on September 16, 2025

In Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, 606 U.S. ____ (2025), the U.S. Supreme Court held t...

Read More
SCOTUS Rules Death Row Inmate Has Standing to Challenge Post Conviction DNA Testing Procedures
by DONALD SCARINCI on September 11, 2025

In Gutierrez v. Saenz, 606 U.S. ____ (2025), the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a death row inmate ha...

Read More
All Posts

The Amendments

  • Amendment1
    • Establishment ClauseFree Exercise Clause
    • Freedom of Speech
    • Freedoms of Press
    • Freedom of Assembly, and Petitition
    Read More
  • Amendment2
    • The Right to Bear Arms
    Read More
  • Amendment4
    • Unreasonable Searches and Seizures
    Read More
  • Amendment5
    • Due Process
    • Eminent Domain
    • Rights of Criminal Defendants
    Read More

Preamble to the Bill of Rights

Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

Read More

More Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of First Step Act to Vacated Sentences
  • SCOTUS Rules E-Cigarette Retailers Can Challenge FDA Order in Fifth Circuit
  • Supreme Court Expands Judicial Review of Agency Actions
  • Supreme Court Pauses Order Reinstating CPSC Commissioners

Constitutional Law Reporter Twitter

A Twitter List by S_H_Law

Constitutional Law Reporter RSS

donald scarinci constitutional law attorney

Editor

Donald Scarinci

Managing Partner

Scarinci Hollenbeck

(201) 806-3364

Awards


Follow me

© 2018 Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC. All rights reserved.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Attorney Advertising