This is the transcript of the arguments before the SC of the Hobby Lobby Case. What do people think of the argument touched on in the debate that under the government's position that theoretically the government could require for profit medical organizations/individuals to perform abortions and that therefore this would be a ridiculous and overly expansive outcome?
I'm wading through the opinion and haven't gotten to that language yet. However, the compelling government interest, strict scrutiny, and least restrictive alternatives (among others) arguments and principles expressed so far are quite interesting. For those of you who aren't into jurisprudence, reading these arguments informs you about the complexity of the law's interpretation and application. Give it a try.
