As I said and as history shows, Supreme Court decisions that are presumed at the time to have “limited impact” do not.

A sampling of court actions since Hobby Lobby suggests that Ginsburg has the better of the argument. She was right: the decision is opening the door for the religiously observant to claim privileges that are not available to anyone else.

What was odd was seeing so many people who should’ve known better – people on the liberal side of the debate – breathe a sigh of relief and claim the decision would only apply to the limited case of Hobby Lobby.

Ah, the whimsical joy that must be present in being so vapidly ignorant of history.