It would be difficult to think of a more emotionally charged issue than mandated employer coverage of prescription contraceptives. A segment of the population holds deep religious convictions against contraception and the so-called morning-after pill. Certainly, those individuals are entitled to their beliefs. Indeed, the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act bars the government from actions that interfere with individuals' religious beliefs.

But what if an individual is the owner of a company and, because of his or her religious beliefs, refuses to comply with Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act regulations that require employers to extend prescription contraceptive coverage to employees? That company would be subjected to massive health care reform law penalties.

The U.S. Supreme Court, as we report on page 1, ruled last week that the owners of privately held companies don't, in fact, have to make such a Hobson's choice. The 1993 religious freedom law, the high court ruled, applies to corporate owners. The law “makes it perfectly clear that Congress did not discriminate in this way against men and women who wish to run their businesses as for-profit corporations in the manner required by their religious beliefs,” the court said.

In the 5-4 decision, the justices suggested two ways employees of privately held companies whose owners object to prescription contraceptives could obtain the coverage.

Under one approach, Congress could pass legislation in which the federal government would provide the coverage to employees working for companies whose owners, due to religious objections, declined to offer coverage. Alternatively, the justices said, regulators could extend rules that now apply to nonprofit religious employers such as Catholic hospitals, allowing health plan administrators to provide the coverage with no direct employer involvement. But this is being challenged in court by dozens of employers.

We suggest a third option: On an issue of such importance and sensitivity, Congress should spell out what employers can and cannot do. There is precedent, as years ago the Supreme Court ruled employers were free to provide less health care benefits for pregnancy-related expenses than other medical conditions. Congress quickly acted, making clear that such a plan design was discriminatory.That law ended the controversy, and we think action by lawmakers on prescription contraceptive coverage would do the same.