So, looks like the Seventh Circuit is racist:
We hold that the plaintiffs — the business owners and their companies — may challenge the mandate. We further hold that compelling them to cover those services substantially burdens their religious-exercise rights. Under RFRA the government must justify the burden under the standard of strict scrutiny. So far it has not done so, and we doubt that it can.
We know that the administration will appeal this, and it seems pretty likely that SCOTUS will take it up. It also seems pretty likely that they’ll uphold the Seventh Circuit. So the real question is, given the lack of a severability clause, in doing so, will Roberts take the opportunity to rectify his screw up last year, and void the entire law?