Law Commons^™

Telling Stories In The Supreme Court: Voices Briefs And The Role Of Democracy In Constitutional Deliberation, Linda H. Edwards

Scholarly Works

On January 4, 2016, over 112 women lawyers, law professors, and former judges told the world that they had had an abortion. In a daring amicus brief that captured national media attention, the women “came out” to their clients; to the lawyers with or against whom they practice; to the judges before whom they appear; and to the Justices of the Supreme Court.

The past three years have seen an explosion of such “voices briefs,” 16 in Obergefell and 17 in Whole Woman’s Health. The briefs can be powerful, but their use is controversial. They tell the stories of non-parties—strangers …

Abortion And Compelled Physician Speech, David Orentlicher

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Flexible Feminism And Reproductive Justice: An Essay In Honor Of Ann Scales, Lynne Henderson

Scholarly Works

Professor Ann Scales began her distinguished career by taking feminism and reproductive justice seriously. She became a leading feminist voice and influence on a number of topics. In later years, she returned to concerns about reproductive justice by presciently emphasizing the need to preserve women’s access to abortions.

This Essay discusses Professor Scales’s concerns and feminist method and then turns to reproductive justice. The Essay notes that, with Scales, a right to abortion is foundational for reproductive justice. The Essay then examines the increasing narrowing of access to abortion through law. The Essay next examines a current crisis over access …

Conscience And Emergency Contraception, Leslie C. Griffin

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Note, A Woman’S Life, A Woman’S Health: Equalizing Medicaid Abortion Funding In Simat Corp. V. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, Sara Gordon

Scholarly Works

This casenote discusses the Arizona Supreme Court’s decision in Simat Corp. v. Arizona Health Care Cost Container System. In a decision deviating from those of the United States Supreme Court, the Arizona Supreme Court declared the Arizona statute and accompanying Arizona Heath Care Cost Containment System provisions unconstitutional because they did not survive strict scrutiny analysis under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Arizona Constitution. Where the state of Arizona has undertaken to fund abortions for indigent women whose lives are directly threatened by pregnancy, it cannot refuse to pay for abortions for similarly indigent women whose health, …

Lawyers And The Abortion Debate: Presenting A Balanced View, Thomas B. Mcaffee

Scholarly Works

The author is pleased to see the publication of A Lawyer Looks at Abortion because legal scholars have much to contribute to the understanding of public questions. Lay readers too often receive distorted impressions of legal issues from the media, and those who understand the system best are frequently too busy writing for the legal community to contribute to popular literature. Yet it is legal scholars who are best equipped to make the intricacies of law accessible to lay persons by defining and explaining legal terms and doctrine and by examining the reasoning found in relevant judicial decisions. Lawyers are …

Electoral Folklore: An Empirical Examination Of The Abortion Issue, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Though partisans on both sides claim credit for electoral victories and defeats, and politicians treat both groups with deference, few studies have attempted to gauge the impact of the abortion issue in more than an anecdotal manner. In 1976, NARAL noted that of the 13 members of the U.S. Representatives that lost re-election bids, nine were pro-life, and four were pro-choice. A study conducted by the Alan Guttmacher Institute of the 1974 House races found that, in “competitive” districts, 92 percent of the pro-choice candidates studied were re-elected while only 61 percent of the pro-life candidates were returned to Congress, …