Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

===Corporate liability===
''[[The New York Times]]'' editor Dorothy J. Samuels invoked the cautionary adage "be careful what you wish for", speculating that "if owners indicate that they are not entirely separate from their corporation—by denying corporation employees' birth control coverage based on their personal religious beliefs—the case could be made in future state-court litigation that they have waived their right to be shielded from responsibility for corporate financial liabilities."<ref name=Samuels>{{cite news|last1=J. Samuels|first1=Dorothy|title=Hobby Lobby, or When Corporations Get Things Both Ways|url=http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/02/hobby-lobby-or-when-corporations-get-things-both-ways/|access-date=Jul 3, 2014|work=The New York Times|date=Jul 2, 2014|archive-date=July 2, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140702193156/http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/02/hobby-lobby-or-when-corporations-get-things-both-ways/|url-status=live}}</ref> The dean of the [[UC Irvine School of Law]], [[Erwin Chemerinsky]], said, "The liabilities of the corporation are not attributed to the owners, so why should the owners be able to attribute their beliefs to the company?"<ref>{{cite news|last1=Chemerinsky|first1=Erwin|title=The broad reach of the narrow Hobby Lobby ruling|url=http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-80679909/|access-date=Jul 3, 2014|work=Los Angeles Times|date=Jun 30, 2014|archive-date=October 6, 2012|archive-url=http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20121006015957/http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-80679909/|url-status=live}}</ref> Several legal scholars wrote an amicus brief to the Supreme Court for this case arguing this danger, while scholars on the other side counter that incorporated non-profit organizations enjoy liability protection despite their activities based on religious or other values/conscience-based causes.<ref>{{cite web|title=Help me rebut the corporate law professors brief in the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood mandate cases|first=Stephen|last=Bainbridge|date=January 30, 2014|url=http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2014/01/help-me-rebut-the-corporate-law-professors-belief-in-the-hobby-lobby-and-conestoga-wood-mandate-case.html|access-date=July 16, 2014|archive-date=July 25, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140725081201/http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2014/01/help-me-rebut-the-corporate-law-professors-belief-in-the-hobby-lobby-and-conestoga-wood-mandate-case.html|url-status=live}}</ref>