June Medical As The New Casey
As in prior abortion cases, the Chief Justice gave abortion supporters a victory while at the same time laying the groundwork for much weaker protections for abortion rights.
June Medical Symposium: The History Behind Third Party Standing Arguments
In the third post in our Symposium on June Medical, Professor Mary Ziegler links Louisiana's argument that doctors lack standing to litigate cases related to abortion with a broader shift in litigation tactics by those opposed to abortion. And she wonders whether a reversal of precedent on standing doctrine could lead inevitably to the end of Casey and Roe.
Updates | The Week of January 22, 2018
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
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.
Updates | The Week of December 18, 2017
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.
Updates | The Week of October 30, 2017
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
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.
Getting To No On Roe
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.
Abortion, Equal Protection, and the ERA—Courts Then and Now
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.
Forced Separation Of Families & Forced To-Term Pregnancies
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.
Senator Collins's Shell Game On Roe v. Wade
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.
Religious Freedom As a Basis for the Right to Choose
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
June Medical Services’ Double Threat to the Rule of Law
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.
June Medical And The End of Reproductive Justice
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
Abortion and #MeToo
The rock-the-world power of #MeToo shows us that the ultimate key to change is story-sharing with families, friends and neighbors
Reproductive Justice Symposium
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
Trump’s Latest Affront To Women, and to the Constitution
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.
Versus Trump: 2017 Scorecard
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!
Versus Trump: Is There A New Title X In Town?
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!
Versus Trump: California X Trump
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!
June Medical Symposium: Abortion Returns To The Supreme Court
On March 4, the Supreme Court will hear its first abortion case in several years. In the first entry of our symposium, Dean Erwin Chemerinsky sets up the stakes—and fears that the case is going to end with the five conservative justices allowing severe restrictions on abortion, such as have not been upheld since Roe v. Wade.
Reproductive Rights and Justice
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
Versus Trump Emergency Pod: JD v. DHS
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!
Key Context for Trump's Rhetoric About Immigrants
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
The Substance of the Supreme Court’s procedure
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.
Legal Challenges To H.J. Res 43
The Republicans’ bill to arbitrarily deny grants to family planning programs could be challenged in several ways.
Disestablishing the Mother
Artificial reproductive technology might disestablish the traditional ideas of maternity on which abortion law and discourse rests
Versus Trump: Contraception Mandate, Round Infinity
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!
Pavan and June Medical Services
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.
When You Have Five, They Let You Do Whatever You Want
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
The Anti-Abortion Movement's Unworkability Strategy
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.
Versus Trump: Borderline Searches + Response To First Mondays
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!
Versus Trump: Updates, Y'all!
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!
A Note Of Caution About Timbs v. Indiana
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.
Pregnant Workers and Reproductive Justice
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.
Versus Trump: Trump Loses On Family Planning, Wins In The Ninth, and More
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!
Symposium on June Medical Services v Gee
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.
Enjoining the Contraception Rules
A district court has stopped the Trump administration's hasty and poorly justified effort to relieve employers of their legal obligation to cover contraception.
Birth Control Is Not Abortion
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.
Justice Kavanaugh Said No On Roe
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?
The Trump Administration And Immigrant Children
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.
A Case To Watch: Garza v. Hargan
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.
Deep Problems with the Proposed Executive Order on Religious Freedom
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.
Getting To No On Roe: It Continues
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.
H.J. Res. 43 As A Health Care Bill
The Democrats have accepted the Republicans’ framing of a bill that would be used to defund Planned Parenthood. That’s a mistake.
Gender Hypocrisy Watch
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.
Stare Decisis, The Supreme Court, And Roe
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.
The New Contraception Rule Is Procedurally Flawed
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.
The Story Thus Far: Reproductive Rights
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 March 27, 2017
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 April 17, 2017
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
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
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
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.
Updates | The Week of April 3, 2017
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
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.