What an odd concurring opinion from Justice Breyer and Kagan:
We agree with JUSTICE GINSBURG that the plaintiffs’ challenge to the contraceptive coverage requirement fails on the merits. We need not and do not decide whether either for-profit corporations or their owners may bring claims under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. Accordingly, we join all but Part III–C–1 of JUSTICE GINSBURG’s dissenting opinion.
How else could the claim fail on the merits, unless they could bring the claim in the first place?