宗教信仰自由之爭議——以美國最高法院Burwell v. Hobby Lobby案為探討核心

Issues on Free Exercise of Religion: Focusing on Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Case

美國之宗教自由處於變遷及不穩定之狀態，最高法院Burwell v. Hobby Lobby案即為其原因及象徵，該案乃最高法院2014年度最值得期待之判決，在美國憲法增修條文第1條之宗教信仰自由條款下，非宗教性營利法人是否得以主張其權利，向為複雜之法律問題，而為法院迴避多年，一方為上開判決歡呼，視為宗教自由之勝利，確立政府不得忽視宗教信念及迫使企業促進其視為謀殺（意指墮胎）之行為，另一方則描繪上開判決為法治之巨大挫敗，法人不得忽視其他人法定之權利，卻不受到任何處罰，無怪乎該判決以5比4極其微小之差距作出。然從最高法院之圓桌會議，亦啟發了新穎且實用之洞見。宗教自由向被視為美國憲法之第一自由條款，本案多數意見開啟宗教自由恢復法之大門，未來希冀適用宗教豁免條款者當不在少數，然當越多個案要求法院減輕對其個人宗教信仰自由之實質負擔，卻將該等負擔之成本轉嫁其他人時，其間之衝突可以想見，Hobby Lobby案恐怕不是爭議之終結，而是起點。本文爬梳Hobby Lobby案之相關脈絡，並將論述核心放在營利法人宗教信仰自由之爭議，及次焦點審查標準之探討，以提供借鏡及作為參考。

American religious liberty is in a state of flux and uncertainty. The controversy surrounding Burwell v. Hobby Lobby is both a cause and a symptom of this condition. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby was one of the most anticipated decisions of the Supreme Court’s 2014 terms. Whether for-profit, secular corporations can asset rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment is a complex legal question that courts have sidestepped for many years. Some hailed the decision as a victory for religious liberty, establishing that the government cannot ignore religious convictions and force business to facilitate what they view as murder. Others described it as a massive setback for rule of law, establishing a loophole by means of which business owners can ignore the legal rights of others impunity. Even by a 5-4 margin, the Hobby Lobby case has inspired novel and useful insights in this roundtable. Freedom of religion is frequently viewed as the “ first religion” under U. S. Constitution. Hobby Lobby case opened the courthouse door for The Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
There will be more claims for religious exemptions from laws of general applicability, and more cases requiring the courts to decide when alleviating one person’s religious burden imposes too much of burden on others. Hobby Lobby case is not an end, but a start.