Reproductive Justice, Rights & Health

Reproductive justice (RJ) is a pivotal movement that supplants the language and limitations of reproductive rights. RJ's tenets are that women have the human rights to decide if or when they'll become pregnant, whether to carry a pregnancy to term, and to parent the children they have in safe and healthy environments. Recognizing the importance of the rights at stake when the law addresses parenting and procreation, the authors in this book re-imagine judicial opinions that address the law's treatment of pregnancy and parenting. The cases cover topics such as forced sterilization, pregnancy discrimination, criminal penalties for women who take illegal drugs while pregnant, and state funding for abortion. Though some of the re-imagined cases come to the same conclusions as the originals, each rewritten opinion analyzes how these cases impact the most vulnerable populations, including people with disabilities, poor women, and women of color.

"This is the first ethnography of American midwives and their clients and advocates. The culmination of more than a decade of participant-observation, interviews, and archival research, this project specifically interrogates the potential and pitfalls of legal and political campaigns for reproductive autonomy"--

Beginning with the introduction of abortion law in the nineteenth century, this reader includes important documents from nearly two hundred years of debate over abortion. These legal briefs, oral arguments, court opinions, newspaper reports, opinion pieces, and contemporary essays are introduced with headnotes that place them in historical context. Chapters cover the birth control movement, changes in abortion law in the 1960s, Roe v. Wade, the Hyde Amendment and the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, state and federal regulation of abortion practices, and the freedom of speech cases surrounding anti-abortion clinic protests. The first section of each chapter sets the stage and explains the choice of documents. This rich, balanced collection is an indispensable reference tool for the study of one of the most passionate debates in American history. It brings together the writings of doctors, lawyers, scientists, philosophers, elected officials, judges, and scholars as few other legal readers do, and it is essential reading for those engaged in the ongoing debate about abortion law in the United States.

In this special bonus episode, Melissa and Kate are joined by co-editor Reva Siegel to discuss their book "Reproductive Rights & Justice Stories," in a conversation moderated by Rebecca Traister and hosted by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law.

In recent years, states have enacted escalating numbers of restrictions on women's reproductive health care, many in the form of targeted regulation of abortion provider (TRAP) laws that shut clinics under the pretense of safeguarding health. In addition, religious objectors are increasingly demanding exemptions from laws protecting access to reproductive health care, including health insurance coverage for contraception. Together these restrictions are dramatically altering women's access to health care. How can advocates challenge these new restrictions under Planned Parenthood v. Casey? What other modes of advocacy are needed, in addition to litigation? Speakers: Caitlin Borgmann, Professor of Law, The City University of New York (CUNY) School of Law Khiara M. Bridges, Associate Professor of Law, Boston University School of Law; Associate Professor of Anthropology, Boston University Kathleen Clyde, State Representative, Ohio House of Representatives, 75th District Louise Melling, Deputy Legal Director, ACLU; Director, ACLU Center for Liberty Julie Rikelman, Litigation Director, Center for Reproductive Rights

This bibliography references select works on the development, interpretation and implementation of women's international human rights as established by the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and other international and regional human rights conventions. This bibliography is confined to international law and does not include materials on national or comparative sex discrimination laws, except to the extent that such articles integrate domestic human rights issues with a discussion international women's human rights law.

Harvard Law Review

Sexual and reproductive health and rights have increasingly been recognized in the international arena, but their evolution and the definition of their scope and content have not been received without controversy. From population control to human rights, from demographers’ competence to governmental prerogative, from couples’ rights to universal rights, this article will present an overview of the evolution of sexual and reproductive rights in the international arena. The development of these rights cannot be read in isolation but must be analyzed together with the broader landscape that hosts social and political movements, ideologies, religions, and revolutions. Understanding sexual and reproductive health and rights as historical creations, rather than timeless givens, enables us to devise historically informed instruments and policies that are more likely to succeed. This article contributes to the scholarly literature by providing an overview of past trends and of the conditions under which they occurred. Retracing the history of these rights enables us to clarify the scope of the state’s obligations to realize the right to sexual and reproductive health, to improve monitoring opportunities, and to ensure accountability for violations. This article explores these (and forthcoming) developments contributing to identify the existing obligations, the relevant actors, and the challenges that lie ahead.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department said Monday that it will not tolerate violence against anyone who is trying to obtain an abortion in Texas as federal officials explore options to challenge a new state law that bans most abortions .

The US Food and Drug Administration announced Thursday that it is lifting a requirement that patients seeking medication abortion had to pick up the medication in-person, instead allowing pills to be sent by mail.

Five women in Texas who were denied abortions are suing the state for denying them necessary medical care even though their pregnancies were nonviable and posed serious risks to their health. “I cannot adequately put into words the trauma and despair that comes with waiting to either lose your own life, your child’s life, or both. For days, I was locked in this bizarre and avoidable hell,” said Amanda Zurawski, the lead plaintiff, during a press conference Tuesday in Austin to announce the case, which also includes two doctors. While the Texas abortion ban is meant to have exceptions, many doctors are reluctant to perform the procedure because of the high legal risk, including the loss of medical licenses, hefty fines and decades in prison. “Right now abortion bans are exposing pregnant people to risks of death, illness and injury, including the loss of fertility,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is bringing the lawsuit, at a press conference Tuesday in Austin. “Contrary to the stated purpose of furthering life, abortion bans are making it less likely that every family who wants to bring a child into the world will be able to do so and survive the experience.”

DALLAS – Dallas-based Greenhouse Outpatient Center and its parent company, American Addiction Centers, agreed to damages of $146,613 and provide other relief to settle a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced today.

As the grassroots arm of the women’s movement, NOW’s purpose is to promote feminist ideals, lead societal change, eliminate discrimination, and achieve and protect the equal rights of all women and girls in all aspects of social, political, and economic life.

In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a shadow docket refusing to block a Texas law banning abortion after six weeks. This new law violates the 1973 landmark decision Roe v. Wade, which declared a pregnant person has a constitutional right to an abortion.

Since the Supreme Court grounded the right to an abortion in a constitutional right to privacy, legal and societal debate has continued around the status of a fetus in utero, a woman’s countervailing claims, and the interests of states and society as a whole. As American courts have faced an issue that intertwines legal, moral, and philosophical questions, so too the halakhic process confronts analogous complexities. The main line of Jewish tradition makes a much-needed contribution to the discussion of abortion. Without sharing the view that the fetus is from conception fully a person, it stops short of a complete dismissal of the value problem in destroying a fetus. However, whatever value attaches to “potential life,” the primary concern lies with the woman. She exists. Her voice and her needs must be heard. And her life, (no matter how slim her chances of survival), health, and mental well-being come first.

Jewish Studies at Rutgers University: Bildner Center for the Study of Jewish Life and Department of Jewish Studies

In overturning Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court thrust abortion into the headlines, reigniting with new intensity one of the most painful battles of the culture wars in this country. Abortion is a complex legal question, a divisive social issue, and—for many Americans—a deeply religious matter. Too often,

As Israel’s Orthodox Jews struggle to live up to high fertility norms rooted in religious and Zionist ideals, an obscured model of stratified critique has emerged. Based on an ethnography of Israel...

Drawing on an ethnographic study of reproduction in Israel, in this article I demonstrate how Orthodox Jews delineate borders between the godly and the human in their daily reproductive practices. ...