orginal text Which part of the $1$st Amendment was at issue in this case?

Discuss how the government violated Hobby Lobby's $1$st Amendment right, according to the U$.$S$.$ Supreme Court.

Hobby Lobby Stores. Inc. is a family owned business, described as "closely held." What does this mean, i$.$e$.,$ what is a closely held corporation? How did the fact Hobby Lobby is closely held make a difference in the court's consideration of Hobby Lobby's $1$st Amendment religious freedom argument? Would the same argument work for a large publicly held corporation like IBM? Should it$?$ Why or why not?

Should a business operating as a nonreligious commercial entity be able to invoke this $1$st Amendment protection at all on the basis of the business owner$($s$)\text{'}$ personal beliefs as human beings? Why or why not? If the business is a separate person, as the Court has held in finding that the business has an independent Constitutional right, how can this "corporate person," as an entity, manifest an independent religious belief? Isn't it separate from its owners? $($For this question you might want to also take a look at the Supreme Court's opinion in the Citizens United case.$)$

Share any additional thoughts you have.