Burwell v. Hobby Lobby is a landmark Supreme Court case that addressed the intersection of corporate rights, religious freedom, and women's healthcare. The case arose when Hobby Lobby, a privately held for-profit corporation owned by a Christian family, challenged the contraceptive mandate imposed by the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This mandate required employers to provide health insurance coverage for certain contraceptives without co-pays. The owners of Hobby Lobby argued that this requirement violated their religious beliefs, as they opposed some contraceptives they viewed as abortifacients.

In a closely contested 5–4 ruling, the Supreme Court held that under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) of 1993, closely held corporations could be exempt from regulations that their owners religiously object to, provided there are less restrictive means of achieving the law's objectives. The Court determined that the contraceptive mandate was not the least restrictive means of ensuring access to contraceptive care, particularly since there were alternative accommodations for religious nonprofits.

The ruling effectively struck down the contraceptive mandate as it applied to Hobby Lobby and similar companies, allowing them to opt out of providing contraceptive coverage based on their religious objections. Following the decision, the Court issued an injunction that effectively ended the alternative arrangement previously in place for religious nonprofits, leading to the implementation of a government-sponsored solution to ensure that female employees of such corporations could still access contraceptive care.