Conscientious Objection, Complicity, and Accommodation
Penn collection
Degree type
Discipline
Subject
Civil Rights and Discrimination
Courts
First Amendment
Law
Legal Theory
Religion Law
Funder
Grant number
License
Copyright date
Distributor
Related resources
Author
Contributor
Abstract
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.1 inaugurated an unprecedented deference to religious challenges to secular laws,2 which Zubik v. Burwell neither retrenched nor replace.3 On the Court's highly deferential stance, complicity claims seem to know no bounds: just so long as the objector thinks himself complicit in an act his religion opposes, the Court will conclude that the challenged legal requirement substantially burdens his religious exercise.4 The result is a set of exemptions of Court-imposed negotiations based on assertions of complicity that many courts and commentators find far-fetched, and perhaps even fantastical.5