{"title":"A Job Is Not a Hobby: The Judicial Revival of Corporate Paternalism and Its Problematic Implications","authors":"L. Strine","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2555816","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article connects the Supreme Court’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby to the history of “corporate paternalism.” It details the history of employer efforts to restrict the freedom of employees, and legislative attempts to ensure worker freedom. It also highlights the role of employment in healthcare coverage, and situates the Affordable Care Act’s “minimum essential guarantees” in a historical and global context. The article also discusses how Hobby Lobby combines with the Supreme Court’s earlier decisions in Citizens United and National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius to constrain the government’s ability to extend the social safety net, and shows how those decisions put pressure on corporate law itself.","PeriodicalId":83094,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of corporation law","volume":"41 1","pages":"71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of corporation law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2555816","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18
Abstract
This article connects the Supreme Court’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby to the history of “corporate paternalism.” It details the history of employer efforts to restrict the freedom of employees, and legislative attempts to ensure worker freedom. It also highlights the role of employment in healthcare coverage, and situates the Affordable Care Act’s “minimum essential guarantees” in a historical and global context. The article also discusses how Hobby Lobby combines with the Supreme Court’s earlier decisions in Citizens United and National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius to constrain the government’s ability to extend the social safety net, and shows how those decisions put pressure on corporate law itself.
这篇文章将最高法院在Burwell v. Hobby Lobby一案中的判决与“企业家长式作风”的历史联系起来。它详细介绍了雇主努力限制雇员自由的历史,以及立法努力确保工人自由的历史。它还强调了就业在医疗保险中的作用,并将《平价医疗法案》的“最低基本保障”置于历史和全球背景下。这篇文章还讨论了Hobby Lobby如何与最高法院早期在“联合公民”和“全国独立企业联合会诉西贝利厄斯案”中做出的裁决相结合,限制政府扩大社会保障网络的能力,并展示了这些裁决如何对公司法本身施加压力。