“While [the Little Sisters] ruling determined on procedural grounds that the administration was within its rights to exempt some employers from the mandate, it did not address the question of whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act compels exemptions of some kind for employers with religious objections, as Justices Alito and Gorsuch persuasively argue that it does… A better outcome would have been to apply the RFRA, considering whether the mandate serves a compelling government interest, whether it imposes a substantial burden on religious employers, and whether it accomplishes its goals by the least restrictive means possible.”
The Editors, National Review

“No one, from the Obama-administration officials who promulgated it to the pro-abortion-rights feminists tearing out their hair over this decision, has once articulated a satisfactory reason for why anyone — let alone Catholic nuns or Christian business owners — must be conscripted into funding an employee’s birth control…

“The belief that the government, or employers compelled by the government, ought to subsidize contraception stems from a fundamentally incorrect, irrational view of contraception as a necessary component of holistic health care. On this view, a properly functioning female reproductive system is diseased and pregnancy is a disease to be prevented… One very well might like to have birth-control drugs for one reason or another, but when used for contraceptive purposes rather than medical ones, it is not health care by any reasonable definition of the term; it prevents no disease and cures no malady.”
Alexandra DeSanctis, National Review

Regarding Morrissey-Berru, “In his majority opinion, Samuel Alito writes that the ministerial exception applies regardless of which discrimination law is in question. The point of that exception is to exempt religious organizations from outside scrutiny of those decisions, as the First Amendment protection of free expression of religion must take precedence…

“One might not need to be called a ‘minister’ for a ministerial exception, but what is the functional limit of that exception? Is there any? Would churches and schools be able to apply it to secretaries and janitors? What about administrative personnel at schools that might come into contact with students but otherwise have no teaching role?…  The problem is that identifying ministerial roles is not the business of courts — it’s the business of the religious institutions themselves. At least, it is now, in Alito’s controlling opinion.”
Ed Morrissey, Hot Air

“Don’t forget the context. Last month’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County extended federal antidiscrimination law to sexual orientation and transgender status. A religious school in progressive California might worry about being sued for dismissing a lay math teacher who began living a proudly gay lifestyle in defiance of the church’s teachings. Justice Neil Gorsuch’s opinion in Bostock dismissed such concerns with a pat line about how those ‘are questions for future cases.’ There will be a blizzard of them, no doubt. It’s a hopeful sign for religious liberty that even liberal Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan joined the Guadalupe majority to expand the ministerial exception.”
Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal

“The ministerial exception protects free exercise of religion within religious institutions. But most religious people don't work there. Thinking strictly in terms of religious liberty, I'd far rather see religious institutions lose the protections specifically at issue in Morrissey-Berru — which is to say, subject them to the same rules about age and disability as everyone else — if that could be somehow traded for broader protection of religious exercise outside of religious contexts…

“To use the gay marriage example from Obergefell, which is where many of these conversations are focused, if you believe God doesn't condone gay marriage, the implications for your behavior don't depend on your working in a religious institution. It's just as applicable, for instance, if you run a cake shop or arrange flowers — but you get no ministerial exception there… [The ministerial exception] operates on too narrow an understanding of what [free exercise of religion] entails.”
Bonnie Kristian, The Week