Page:Burwell v Hobby Lobby.pdf/6

6 , e.g., for vaccinations or blood transfusions, must necessarily fall if they conflict with an employer's religious beliefs. Nor does it provide a shield for employers who might cloak illegal discrimination as a religious practice. United States v. Lee, 455 U. S. 252, which upheld the payment of Social Security taxes despite an employer's religious objection, is not analogous. It turned primarily on the special problems associated with a national system of taxation; and if Lee were a RFRA case, the fundamental point would still be that there is no less restrictive alternative to the categorical requirement to pay taxes. Here, there is an alternative to the contraceptive mandate. Pp. 45–49.

No. 13–354, 723 F. 3d 1114, affirmed; No. 13–356, 724 F. 3d 377, reversed and remanded.

, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which, C. J., and , , and , JJ., joined. , J., filed a concurring opinion. , J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which, J., joined, and in which and , JJ., joined as to all but Part III–C–1. and, JJ., filed a dissenting opinion.