Reproductive Justice, Rights & Health

We must stand up to politicians who want to restrict people’s ability to make their own health care decisions in consultation with their doctors.

National Background and ContextEach year, a broad cross section of people in the United States obtain abortions. In 2017, 862,320 abortions were provided in clinical settings in the United States.The U.S. Supreme Court recognized the constitutional right to abortion in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and has reaffirmed that right in subsequent decisions.

Reproductive freedom and voting are intrinsically linked. 'As long as women's reproductive freedom continues to be politicized, women must vote.' 'Controlling women’s bodies has been a method of subjugation for

WASHINGTON • The Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives plans to debate and vote on legislation aimed at stopping states from enacting tough anti-abortion regulations like the one in Texas, Speaker

Three Democrats – Bush, Barbara Lee and Pramila Jayapal – spoke before House oversight committee hearing on reproductive rights

Text for H.R.2694 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

Summary of H.R.1581 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Reproductive Rights are Human Rights Act of 2019

Sex and reproductive health-related bills in the U.S. Congress.

The Center for Reproductive Rights uses the power of law to advance reproductive rights as fundamental human rights around the world.

Good reproductive health policy starts with credible research

BREAKING: The Supreme Court has taken away our right to abortion and overturned Roe v. Wade, opening the floodgates for states across the country to ban abortion.

Reproductive rights—having the ability to decide whether and when to have children—are important to women’s socioeconomic well-being and overall health. Research suggests that being able to make decisions about one’s own reproductive life and the timing of one’s entry into parenthood is associated with greater relationship stability and satisfaction (National Campaign to Prevent Teen and […]

Even with the pandemic wreaking havoc on the U.S. and global health care systems and economies, reproductive health care needs and decisions cannot be put on hold during the COVID-19 crisis.

The Center for Reproductive Rights is a global human rights organization of lawyers and advocates who ensure reproductive rights are protected in law as fundamental human rights for the dignity, equality, health, and well-being of every person.

/PRNewswire/ -- The Center for Reproductive Rights, a global human rights organization, today released a powerful video in which its Creative Council and...

July 16, 2020 Reproductive Rights in 2020: June Medical Services v. Russo and COVID-19 2020 has been a notable year for reproductive rights. On one hand, the Supreme Court has decided June Medical Services v. Russo, its first abortion-related case following the changeover from Justices Scalia and Kennedy to Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. On the other hand, the COVID-19 pandemic has also impacted access to abortion, sexual health, and reproductive health services. For example, hospitals have been struggling with how to keep patients and providers safe from COVID-19 while respecting the autonomy of laboring parents. Some policymakers have labeled abortion services non-essential while some providers work to use telehealth to deliver reproductive services. Join us for a discussion of the Supreme Court’s decision in June Medical and a dissection of the impact that COVID-19 has had on this field. Join the conversation on Twitter: @PetrieFlom #ReproRights2020. Panelists Introduction: Carmel Shachar, Executive Director, The Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School Mary Ziegler, Stearns Weaver Miller Professor of Law, Florida State University College of Law Jamille Fields Allsbrook, Director of Women’s Health and Rights, Center for American Progress Louise P. King, Director of Reproductive Bioethics at the Harvard Medical School Center for Bioethics and Assistant Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology at Harvard Medical School Julie Rikelman, Senior Director, Center for Reproductive Rights and lead attorney for the plaintiffs in June Medical Services LLC v. Russo Moderator: Emily Bazelon, staff writer at The New York Times Magazine and Truman Capote Fellow for Creative Writing and Law at Yale Law School For more information, visit our website at https://petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/events/details/reproductive-rights-in-2020

Donald Scarinci of Scarinci Hollenbeck a business law firm in New Jersey discusses Grisworld v. Connecticut. Supreme Court decisions remain relevant long after they are decided, often setting legal precedent for years and even decades. The landmark decision of Griswold v. Connecticut is a perfect example. Vice President Joe Biden referenced the case in a speech at a political fundraiser I attended earlier this month in New Jersey. He was responding to comments by Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum suggesting that the case was decided incorrectly. In Griswold, the Supreme Court affirmed the right of married couples to use contraception. The Court later extended that right to unmarried couples in Eisenstadt v. Baird. Together, the cases ultimately paved the way for the Supreme Court's decision regarding abortion in Roe v. Wade. To see this script in its entirety, please visit www.constitutionallawreporter.com or visit: http://scarinciattorney.com/griswold-v-connecticut-back-in-the-spotlight-as-birth-control-debate-resurfaces/

Any day now, the Court could protect abortion rights — or open the floodgates for more restrictions.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court agreed Monday to a showdown over abortion in a case that could dramatically alter nearly 50 years of rulings on abortion rights. With three justices appointed by President Donald Trump part of a 6-3 conservative majority, the court is taking on a case about whether states can ban abortions before a fetus can survive outside the womb.

The Supreme Court has ended the nation's constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Senate Democrats on Wednesday accused the U.S. Supreme Court of abusing its "shadow docket" process for considering emergency actions to deliver conservatives major wins on cases involving broad social and political issues without public deliberation.

The cases addressed Trump’s broadening of religious exemptions for providing birth control in the Affordable Care Act

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday officially denied an emergency request from abortion providers to block a controversial Texas law that bans abortions after six weeks, before many women know that they are pregnant.

Abortion rights advocates warn of a threat to the landmark 1973 precedent.

JACKSON — For eight years, Derenda Hancock has ushered women from their cars to the doors of Mississippi’s only abortion clinic, donning a rainbow vest as she…

A warrior for reproductive rights, Julie Rikelman ’97 has taken the fight for access to abortion to the Supreme Court and won.

This article was updated on Dec. 1 at 5:15 p.m. It has been nearly 30 years since the Supreme Court’s decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed the constitutional right to abortion that the court first recognized in Roe v. Wade. Only one justice who participated in Casey is still

WASHINGTON (AP) — In the biggest challenge to abortion rights in decades, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Wednesday signaled they would allow states to ban abortion much earlier in pregnancy and may even overturn the nationwide right that has existed for nearly 50 years.

A Louisiana suit threatens to unravel dozens of cases nationwide by blocking abortion providers from challenging restrictions on behalf of their patients.