Listen Live
Donate
 on air
Schedule

KCRW

Read & Explore

  • News
  • Entertainment
  • Food
  • Culture
  • Events

Listen

  • Live Radio
  • Music
  • Podcasts
  • Full Schedule

Information

  • About
  • Careers
  • Help / FAQ
  • Newsletters
  • Contact

Support

  • Become a Member
  • Become a VIP
  • Ways to Give
  • Shop
  • Member Perks

Become a Member

Donate to KCRW to support this cultural hub for music discovery, in-depth journalism, community storytelling, and free events. You'll become a KCRW Member and get a year of exclusive benefits.

DonateGive Monthly

Copyright 2025 KCRW. All rights reserved.

Report a Bug|Privacy Policy|Terms of Service|
Cookie Policy
|FCC Public Files

Back to To the Point

To the Point

The Supreme Court Wraps Up Its Term

Two key Supreme Court decisions  were made today. One allows closely held companies to opt out of the requirement of having to provide contraception coverage for employees under Obamacare; the other allows some public employees to avoid paying dues to the union representing them.

  • rss
  • Share
KCRW placeholderBy Barbara Bogaev • Jun 30, 2014 • 1 min read

Two key Supreme Court decisions were made today. One allows closely held companies to opt out of the requirement of having to provide contraception coverage for employees under Obamacare; the other allows some public employees to avoid paying dues to the union representing them.

In a 5-4 decision today the court sided with the Hobby Lobby crafts stores and Conestoga Wood, a cabinet making company, in a contraceptive case. Both companies claimed their Christian beliefs compel them not to cover certain kinds of contraception mandated under Obamacare. The court ruled that so-called “closely held” companies such as these qualify could for an exemption under the healthcare law if it violated the owners’ religious beliefs.

In the other big ruling this morning, the Court decided that unions cannot force home care workers to pay their dues. Many labor supporters and court watchers referred to Harris v. Quinn as the session’s sleeper case -- seemingly a dry challenge over the right of unions to demand dues, but lying just below the surface are implications that could affect the future of electoral politics, immigration reform, hiking the minimum wage, and other issues of vital national importance.

  • KCRW placeholder

    Barbara Bogaev

    radio journalist

  • KCRW placeholder

    Dahlia Lithwick

    Author; Senior legal affairs correspondent, Slate; podcast host, Amicus podcast

  • KCRW placeholder

    Ilya Shapiro

    Cato Institute

  • KCRW placeholder

    David Savage

    Supreme Court reporter for the Los Angeles Times

    NewsNationalPolitics
Back to To the Point