ABSTRACT
NFIB v. Sebelius asks nothing about freedom of conscience, says nothing about freedom of conscience, and does nothing about freedom of conscience. At the same time, it highlights serious limitations on the courts’ ability to protect freedom of conscience. In this case, the courts passed up an opportunity to offer protection to citizens when the government demands that the citizens take actions to which they morally object. The Court’s decision may have been wise. There must be some limits to freedom of conscience. 1 Still, the decision in Sebelius raises troubling questions about the extent to which citizens who are pressured to violate their consciences may count on the Court for relief. Not only the Court’s decision but also most of the opinions in Sebelius have disturbing implications for citizens whose moral commitments clash with the government’s demands.
