The Affordable Care Act’s preventive services mandate requires private insurance plans to serve public health goals. But the employers that facilitate access to insurance for more than half the population hold political views and economic interests that may run counter to public interests. And now, in the name of for-profit employers’ religious rights, the courts are eroding the legal foundations of privately financed public health. Religious objections to the preventive services mandate — of which Braidwood Management, Inc. v. Becerra is just the most recent high-profile example — have become a site of opposition to public health. Courts have radically revised standards for religious exemption, adopting an individualistic frame that discounts population-level effects. Recent decisions could invite free exercise claims that go to the heart of securing population health through the workplace.
