Reproductive Freedom

By seeking to defund Planned Parenthood, imposing sharp limits on foreign aid to groups that provide abortion counseling, and revising key parts of the Affordable Care Act, the Trump Administration has besieged reproductive rights.

Symposium on June Medical Services v Gee

10/4/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

June Medical Services v. Gee involves a Louisiana law that would require abortion providers to obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of where they perform abortions. SCOTUS has granted review of the constitutionality of that law.

Take Care

June Medical And The End of Reproductive Justice

10/2/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

While June Medical does not ask the Court to overturn Roe v. Wade or Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the practical effect of the state’s positions would allow states to regulate abortion out of existence

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Pavan and June Medical Services

9/27/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

Pavan and June Medical Services are both examples of lower courts bending over backwards to avoid the clear command of Supreme Court precedent. Both merit the same treatment from the Supreme Court – summary reversal.

Take Care

A Duplicitous Playbook: June Medical Services v. Gee and the New Jane Crow

9/24/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

What is clear in June Medical Services v. Gee, as with the other antiabortion measures making their way through the courts, is that these targeted regulations of abortion providers have nothing to do with protecting women or their health

Take Care

The Anti-Abortion Movement's Unworkability Strategy

9/23/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

Antiabortion lawyers think that they can turn a fact and evidence-based legal standard into an argument against stare decisis, which would advance their ultimate goal of overturning Roe. In June Medical, it is time for the justices to prove them wrong.

Take Care

SCOTUS Needs to Rein in Lower Courts Willing to Force Its Hand by Defying Its Precedent

9/19/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

By David Strauss: Ideological lower court judges have challenged the Supreme Court by defying its precedent. There is one way for the Court to keep from being put in this position time and again. It should summarily reverse, making clear that only the Court will decide when its own precedent is no longer good law.

Take Care

Updates | The Week of January 22, 2018

1/28/18  //  Daily Update

A year after President Trump's reinstatement of the global gag rule, banning U.S. funding to foreign organizations that promote or provide abortion, advocacy groups report significant harms to health services. HHS's new religious freedom division constitutes a new attack on women's health, wrote Jamille Fields at The Hill.

Updates | The Week of January 15, 2018

1/14/18  //  Daily Update

Texas argues in court that undocumented women seeking abortions have no substantive due process rights. The Trump Administration maintains its blanket policy and prevents another undocumented minor from getting an abortion.

Zachary Piaker

Columbia Law School

Updates | The Week of December 18, 2017

12/24/17  //  Daily Update

Another federal judge blocked a Trump Administration executive order that would allow employers with religious objections to refuse employee's contraceptive coverage as a part of healthcare plans. A federal district court in Michigan has upheld a right to display signs depicting aborted fetuses.

Update | The Week of November 27, 2017

12/4/17  //  Daily Update

The Office of Refugee Resettlement attempted to prevent migrant teens from securing abortions.

Jeffrey Stein

Columbia Law School

Updates | The Week of October 30, 2017

11/5/17  //  Daily Update

Notre Dame University ended contraception coverage for students and staff after the Trump administration rolled back the contraception coverage mandate under the Affordable Care Act.

Updates | The Week of October 2, 2017

10/8/17  //  Daily Update

The administration voiced its support for a ban on abortions after twenty weeks. The ACLU is suing the FDA over restrictions on medication used for abortions.

Relitigating Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt

2/12/18  //  Commentary

A recently filed amicus brief highlights how one court has departed from Whole Woman's Health and other cases.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Getting To No On Roe

7/5/18  //  In-Depth Analysis

The question is not whether the reconstituted Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade. The only question is how the Supreme Court will do so.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Abortion, Equal Protection, and the ERA—Courts Then and Now

6/11/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

A half century ago women and men challenging abortion restrictions were creative in making claims on the Constitution, taking to the streets, to the legislatures, and to the courts. In their audacity and creativity, we can find our future.

Reva Siegel

Yale Law School

Melissa Murray

NYU Law School

Kate Shaw

Cardozo Law

Forced Separation Of Families & Forced To-Term Pregnancies

6/7/18  //  Commentary

The administration’s policy of forcibly separating children from their parents highlights some of the shortcomings with the legal justifications for the administration’s position in Azar v. Garza, the case in which the administration is refusing to allow undocumented women in its custody to obtain abortions.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Senator Collins's Shell Game On Roe v. Wade

7/3/18  //  Quick Reactions

Susan Collins claimed that there is no reason to worry about Justice Kennedy's replacement because the Chief Justice (!!!) and Justice Gorsuch (¯\_(ツ)_/¯) would never overturn Roe v. Wade. That's wrong.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Religious Freedom As a Basis for the Right to Choose

5/16/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

If Roe is overturned, doctrines of religious freedom may help safeguard reproductive rights, but only if we build the groundwork by recovering the history of religious reproductive justice and amplifying the moral reasoning of pregnant people

Elizabeth Sepper

Washington University

June Medical Services’ Double Threat to the Rule of Law

9/17/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

In recent months, commentators and the justices themselves have raised concerns about declining public confidence in the judiciary. But confidence has to be earned. Enforcing the law and summarily reversing the Fifth Circuit is an essential first step.

Take Care

The Trump DOJ's Puzzlingly Blasé View About Abortion Timing

10/30/17  //  Commentary

DOJ's position was about opposition to abortion, full stop. This explains it's baffling indifference to delaying to the moral implications of delaying a second-trimester abortion by eleven days.

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

Abortion and #MeToo

5/15/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

The rock-the-world power of #MeToo shows us that the ultimate key to change is story-sharing with families, friends and neighbors

Suzanne Goldberg

Columbia Law School

Hargan v. Garza And The (Near) Future Of Abortion Access

11/16/17  //  Commentary

Hargan v. Garza is but one instance in a broader attack on abortion access.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

The (Ir)relevance of parental consent requirements to Garza

9/5/18  //  Quick Reactions

Judge Kavanaugh suggested he was faithfully applying parental consent cases in Garza v. Hargan. He's wrong.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Courts, Law, and Social Change: A Response to Litman

5/15/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

Courts are important, but they are not the only sun around which all other entities revolve and from which they gain their light

Courtney Cahill

FSU College of Law

Reproductive Justice Symposium

5/24/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

Take Care has hosted a symposium on "Reproductive Rights and Justice Stories"—an important new book edited by Melissa Murray, Katherine Shaw, and Reva B. Siegel

Take Care

Reinvigorating Defensive Crouch Liberal Constitutionalism Part 2: Will Clarence Thomas Save Abortion Rights?

7/19/18  //  Commentary

Would Justice Thomas really strike down federal legislation restricting abortion? We may soon find out.

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

Trump’s Latest Affront To Women, and to the Constitution

6/2/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

A draft of the Trump Administration's revised contraception mandate has been leaked. If implemented, this policy would weaken civil rights for women. Moreover, the plan could violate the Establishment Clause by providing a religious accommodation for some private citizens only by shifting costs to others who may not share their beliefs.

Nelson Tebbe

Brooklyn Law School

Micah Schwartzman

University of Virginia School of Law

Richard C. Schragger

UVA School of Law

Versus Trump: 2017 Scorecard

1/4/18  //  Uncategorized

On the first episode of Versus Trump of 2018, Jason and Charlie look back at Versus Trump cases in 2017 and score them as Administration wins, losses, or not-yet-decided. They also look ahead at big issues to come in 2018. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

The Bladensburg Cross Decision – A Twisted Cross and the Remaking of Establishment Clause Standards

6/24/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Court has adopted unreflectively the perspective of Christians in a political majority, without regard to the perspective of others

Robert W. Tuttle

George Washington University Law School

Ira C. Lupu

George Washington University Law School

Versus Trump: Is There A New Title X In Town?

7/4/19  //  Commentary

This week on Versus Trump, Jason and Charlie are joined by guest host Alexandra Brodsky to discuss the Ninth's Circuit's recent decision that let go into effect major new regulations for the primary federal program dealing with family planning and women's health—a program known as Title X. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Versus Trump: California X Trump

3/7/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

On this week's episode of Versus Trump, Charlie and Jason discuss a new lawsuit from California challenging new regulations regarding Title X, an important federal family planning program. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Reproductive Rights and Justice

5/13/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

The story of reproductive justice extends far beyond courts and involves all the conditions in which individuals make decisions about having and not having children

Kate Shaw

Cardozo Law

Reva Siegel

Yale Law School

Melissa Murray

NYU Law School

Versus Trump Emergency Pod: JD v. DHS

10/26/17  //  Commentary

On this week’s episode of Versus Trump, Easha and Charlie have a quick turn-around emergency pod to discuss an ongoing—wait, just now resolved—case filed by a pregnant 17-year-old girl in federal immigration custody who seeks an abortion. Easha and Charlie first talk about the procedural wrangling that this case has wrought and second about the legal claims in the case, which bring them into the exciting worlds of reproductive rights, immigration law, and international relations. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Elusive Silver Linings & The Deregulatory First Amendment

7/9/18  //  Commentary

Sometimes the oncoming storm is easier to spot than the silver linings.

Key Context for Trump's Rhetoric About Immigrants

5/17/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

President Trump's rhetoric draw upon a familiar narrative that pathologizes immigration and immigrant reproduction as a threat while protecting and supporting the nation’s “good” mothers, families, and neighborhood

Yvonne Lindgren

UCSF Law School

The Substance of the Supreme Court’s procedure

2/13/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

Last week’s Supreme Court stay orders say a lot about how the Court views the substance of the underlying constitutional claims in Dunn v. Ray and June Medical Services v. Gee.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Legal Challenges To H.J. Res 43

4/6/17  //  Quick Reactions

The Republicans’ bill to arbitrarily deny grants to family planning programs could be challenged in several ways.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Disestablishing the Mother

5/20/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

Artificial reproductive technology might disestablish the traditional ideas of maternity on which abortion law and discourse rests

Courtney Cahill

FSU College of Law

Getting To No On Roe: It's Already Started

9/11/18  //  Uncategorized

A recent Eighth Circuit case shows how courts and the newly reconstituted Supreme Court will perform legal gymnastics in order to limit Roe and Casey.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

There Goes Title X: Title X is Contraception, Folks

6/22/19  //  Commentary

By Priscilla J. Smith: Conservatives are hiding behind the abortion debate to attack contraceptive access and getting away with it

Take Care

Race, Class, and Challenges to Abortion Restrictions

5/17/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

Race and class are intricately entwined with laws like the Hyde Amendment, and no advocacy on the issue can ignore this fact

David S. Cohen

Thomas R. Kline School of Law

Versus Trump: Contraception Mandate, Round Infinity

1/3/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

On this week's episode of Versus Trump, Charlie, Jason, and Easha comment on several cases addressing whether the Trump Administration may legally expand the number of employers who do not need to provide insurance that includes coverage for contraception. Listen now!

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Mike Pence on Women, Sex, And Reproductive Health Services

4/4/17  //  Commentary

The Vice President’s policy against dining with women reveals some problems with his recent vote to allow states to deny funding to organizations that are devoted to reproductive justice and reproductive health.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Chief Justice John Roberts’ Next Move Will Tell Us A Lot

2/13/19  //  Commentary

While Roberts deserves some praise for his vote last week, the story of this Louisiana law is far from over. And what Roberts does next will tell us a lot—about him and the trajectory of the Court he leads.

Brianne J. Gorod

Constitutional Accountability Center

When You Have Five, They Let You Do Whatever You Want

5/14/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

While several of the essays in the edited collection of Reproductive Rights And Justice Stories talk about social movements that have influenced the law, some recent events suggest we should have those discussions without losing our focus on courts themselves

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Toward an Expansive Conception of Reproductive Rights and Justice

6/5/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

The responses to our edited volume promise continuing conflict over questions of reproductive justice in federal and state courts—but also highlight new arenas of action in politics, science, and religion

Reva Siegel

Yale Law School

Kate Shaw

Cardozo Law

Melissa Murray

NYU Law School

June Medical Services v. Gee and the Future of Abortion Rights

9/16/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

June Medical Services v. Gee is the Supreme Court’s next opportunity to weigh in on women’s constitutional right to decide to end their pregnancies.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Hargan v. Garza As The Trump Administration's Vision For DOJ

11/13/17  //  Commentary

DOJ's conduct in Hargan v. Garza is the clearest example of how this administration wants to use DOJ for political purposes.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Trump and Pence Invoke Conscience to Block Contraception, Contrary to Our Religious Liberty Tradition

6/4/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Regulatory changes that the Trump-Pence Administration reportedly plans to implement extend well beyond our religious liberty traditions (and beyond accommodations authorized by the Supreme Court)

Douglas NeJaime

Yale Law School

Reva Siegel

Yale Law School

Versus Trump: Borderline Searches + Response To First Mondays

11/16/17  //  Commentary

On this week’s episode of Versus Trump, Jason and Charlie discuss a new lawsuit that forces courts to answer the question of whether the federal government needs a warrant to search people's electronic devices at the U.S. border, and they also respond to a discussion on the Supreme Court podcast First Mondays regarding the government's recent filing in the Hargan v. Garza abortion case. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Versus Trump: Updates, Y'all!

11/9/17  //  Commentary

You want updates, so we've got updates! On this week’s episode of Versus Trump, Jason and Easha revisit several important cases and news items that we've previously mentioned so that you have the latest information on them. Listen now!

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Roe v. Wade, Frontiero v. Richadson, and the Equal Rights Amendment

5/20/19  //  Commentary

I clerked for Justice Brennan at the time. Here's how the proposed Equal Rights Amendment affected Roe v Wade and Frontiero v. Richardson.

Geoffrey R. Stone

UChicago Law School

A Note Of Caution About Timbs v. Indiana

2/25/19  //  Quick Reactions

The concurring opinions in Timbs v. Indiana raise some concerns about how (some of) the Justices would address the Trump administration’s treatment of undocumented minor women.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

The Cert Denial in Planned Parenthood v. Jegley

5/30/18  //  Quick Reactions

The Supreme Court's denial of cert in Planned Parenthood v. Jegley raises some concerns.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Pregnant Workers and Reproductive Justice

5/21/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

Despite legal efforts to eliminate it, pregnancy discrimination remains rampant. Responses based in liberty, temporary disability, and sex equality arguments have met limited success in courts.

Jessica Clarke

Vanderbilt Law School

Texas’s More Honest Take On Garza v. Hargan

1/11/18  //  In-Depth Analysis

Everything is bigger in Texas, including the outlandish arguments made to prevent undocumented young women from obtaining abortions.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

The Significance of Chief Justice Roberts Joining in the Stay of the Louisiana Abortion Law

2/8/19  //  Quick Reactions

So no, the abortion right is not safe. But it's not in quite as much immediate danger as one might have thought. And that's not nothing.

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

Versus Trump: Trump Loses On Family Planning, Wins In The Ninth, and More

5/16/19  //  Uncategorized

This week on Versus Trump, Jason and Easha go through a few updates to cases involving Title X, which provides money for family planning; the Administration's policy to have many asylum applicants removed to Mexico; and the controversial border wall. Trump lost one, won one—for now, and hasn't yet gotten a decision in the third. Listen now!

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Enjoining the Contraception Rules

12/18/17  //  Commentary

A district court has stopped the Trump administration's hasty and poorly justified effort to relieve employers of their legal obligation to cover contraception.

Nick Bagley

University of Michigan Law School

Birth Control Is Not Abortion

9/7/18  //  Quick Reactions

By Greg Lipper: At his confirmation hearing, Judge Kavanaugh used the phrase “abortion-inducing drugs" while referring to a case he heard on the DC Circuit. This description of the case is at odds with modern science and suggests his hostility to foundational privacy precedents.

Take Care

Justice Kavanaugh Said No On Roe

2/11/19  //  Quick Reactions

In June Medical Services, Justice Kavanaugh did exactly what reproductive justice advocates said he did on the court of appeals, and warned he would do once he got to the Supreme Court. Are you listening Susan Collins?

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

President Trump’s 'Pro-Life' Week

10/9/17  //  Commentary

There are many ways to protect life, yet we often speak as if restricting abortion is the only way to do so

Rachel Tuchman

Kaplan & Company

The Trump Administration And Immigrant Children

5/25/18  //  Quick Reactions

The news that the Trump administration lost undocumented children after placing them in the custody of minors calls to mind Azar v. Garza, the case in which the administration insists on placing minors into the custody of sponsors before the minors can obtain abortions.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

A Case To Watch: Garza v. Hargan

10/19/17  //  Quick Reactions

One facet of the government's position in Garza v. Hargan got a laugh at the Supreme Court when the government raised it in another case.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Trump's Unyielding Religious Exemptions from the Contraceptive Coverage Requirement Are Unconstitutional

3/26/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

The administration has issued a religious exemption rule that collides with the Establishment Clause

The Constitutional Rule Against Bans On Previability Abortions Applies to Mississippi

4/22/19  //  Commentary

We recently filed an amicus brief asking the Fifth Circuit to apply the well settled rule that states may not prohibit women from accessing abortions prior to viability.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Take Care

Deep Problems with the Proposed Executive Order on Religious Freedom

5/3/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

It's rumored that tomorrow, Trump will issue an executive order on "religious freedom," singling out for protection only traditional and conservative religious views on sex, marriage, sexual orientation, gender identity, and pregnancy. That order will most certainly raise grave constitutional issues under the Establishment Clause.

Ira C. Lupu

George Washington University Law School

Robert W. Tuttle

George Washington University Law School

Getting To No On Roe: It Continues

1/29/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

Another recent decision from a court of appeals (this time the Fifth Circuit) illustrates how states and courts can undermine women’s right to decide to end their pregnancies without formally overruling the relevant Supreme Court decisions.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Versus Trump: Preventing The Prevention Of The Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program

5/17/18  //  Commentary

On this week's episode of Versus Trump, Easha, Charlie, and Jason discuss a series of recent rulings that have stopped the Trump Administration from revoking federal grants to entities that have been working to reduce teen pregnancy. Listen now!

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

H.J. Res. 43 As A Health Care Bill

4/5/17  //  Commentary

The Democrats have accepted the Republicans’ framing of a bill that would be used to defund Planned Parenthood. That’s a mistake.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Gender Hypocrisy Watch

3/11/19  //  Commentary

The administration’s recent claims about gender violence and the humanitarian crisis at the border underscore the administration’s hypocrisy on issues related to gender.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Stare Decisis, The Supreme Court, And Roe

7/9/18  //  Commentary

Some further evidence that a mere belief in stare decisis and judicial precedent does not mean a judge will not overrule cases, as Susan Collins has (falsely) suggested.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Can Public Health Help Abortion Rights?

5/22/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

Reproductive justice advocates have increasingly relied on public health research in legislative and judicial disputes

Rachel Rebouché

Temple University School of Law.

The New Contraception Rule Is Procedurally Flawed

6/1/17  //  Commentary

The Trump Department of Health and Human Services has proposed a massive expansion of the program that provides employers and exemption from providing their employees with contraceptive coverage. But they have not sought notice-and-comment on the rule, and that could be a major problem.

Nick Bagley

University of Michigan Law School

The Story Thus Far: Reproductive Rights

3/16/17  //  Daily Update

The Trump Administration has already taken extraordinary steps to undermine reproductive rights. Here are some useful analyses of the story thus far.

Updates | The Week of May 8, 2017

5/14/17  //  Daily Update

President Trump's appointments and judicial nominations could be an attack on reproductive rights.

Updates | The Week of March 27, 2017

4/2/17  //  Daily Update

Vice President Pence cast a tie-breaking vote in the Senate on Thursday removing a procedural obstacle to repealing Obama-era Title X family planning funding. A proposed executive order aimed at religious liberty has profound constitutional infirmities.

Updates | The Week of August 14, 2017

8/20/17  //  Daily Update

New regulations may allow even private businesses to opt out of contraception coverage.

Updates | The Week of March 20, 2017

3/26/17  //  Daily Update

President Trump's "alternative facts" spread to the abortion debate.

Updates | The Week of July 10, 2017

7/16/17  //  Daily Update

The most recent version of the Republican healthcare bill, like its predecessors, threatens to "defund" Planned Parenthood.

Updates | The Week of April 17, 2017

4/23/17  //  Daily Update

The recent law allowing states to pull funding from organizations such as Planned Parenthood will particularly hurt undocumented women. And the march for science represents a march for reproductive justice against unscientific TRAP laws and crisis pregnancy centers.

Updates | The Week of June 5, 2017

6/11/17  //  Daily Update

There was much analysis of the Administration's proposed rule on contraceptive coverage after the full document was made public.

Updates | The Week of June 12, 2017

6/18/17  //  Daily Update

Jessica Mason Pieklo of Rewire argues that the Administration's actions have not ended litigation challenging the ACA's birth control benefit.

Updates | The Week of May 29, 2017

6/4/17  //  Daily Update

The Trump administration proposed a rule that would undermine the Affordable Care Act’s birth control benefit. Meanwhile, an advocate argued against framing abortion as an economic issue.

Helen Klein Murillo

Harvard Law School '17

Updates | The Week of April 3, 2017

4/9/17  //  Daily Update

This week on Take Care, Leah Litman offered analysis of H.J. Res. 43, the bill that would allow states to deny federal grants to women's health care programs. Other commentators looked to the future of reproductive freedom under the Trump administration.

Updates | The Week of April 10, 2017

4/16/17  //  Daily Update

This week, President Trump signed into law a bill that allows states to deny funding to Title X clinics. Leah Litman offered analysis of possible legal challenges to the bill on Take Care.