Law Commons^™

The Undue Burden: Parental Notification Requirements For Publicly Funded Contraception, Stephanie Bornstein

Stephanie Bornstein

This article analyzes the legal impact of legislative proposals in 1998 and 1999 to require parental notification for minors seeking publicly funded contraception. Part I explores the history of Title X and some of its amendments, the HHS interpretive “squeal rule,” and the federal courts' rejection of the HHS rule based on the congressional intent behind Title X. Part II focuses on the Parental Notification Act of 1998 and its likelihood for success against a constitutional challenge, based on an analysis of precedent on parental consent requirements for contraception and abortion. Part III discusses the change in the legislative and …

Jurisdictional Question In Hobby Lobby, The, Erin Morrow Hawley

Faculty Publications

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores may well be the biggest case of the term. And by its own rules, the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction. An obscure statute, the Anti-Injunction Act of 1867 (“the AIA”), imposes a pay-first requirement for federal tax challenges. The deeply held conventional wisdom is that the AIA is a jurisdictional statute, and there is a good argument that the AIA applies to the contraception mandate. As we learned from National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 132 S.Ct. 2566 (2012), the best evidence of whether Congress intended the AIA to apply is the text. The mandate …

Corporations And Religious Freedom: Hobby Lobby Stores - A Missed Opportunity To Reconcile A Flawed Law With A Flawed Health Care System, Matthew A. Melone

Matthew A. Melone

On June 30, 2014, the Supreme Court held, in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., that the requirement imposed on employer group health insurance plans to provide coverage for certain contraceptives unduly burdened the free exercise rights of three closely-held corporations in violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 ( RFRA ). The contraception mandate was imposed by regulations implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, itself a very controversial piece of legislation a part of which was upheld recently by the Court in a perhaps a case more controversial than Hobby Lobby Stores. RFRA was enacted …

Narrow Tailoring, Compelling Interests, And Free Exercise: On Aca, Rfra And Predictability, Mark Strasser

Mark Strasser

The holding in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Incorporated was narrow in scope—closely held, for-profit corporations must be afforded an exemption from providing insurance coverage for a few types of contraception if the corporation has religious objections to providing that coverage. In addition, the exemption requirement was based on a construction of federal statute rather than on the Constitution’s free exercise guarantees. Both the narrowness of the holding and the Court’s express disavowal that it was offering a constitutional analysis might make the opinion appear relatively inconsequential. However, because the opinion changes the focus and standards of federal law and …

Is Contraception Mandate ‘No Big Deal?’, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York - Catholic Charities Of The Diocese Of Albany V. Serio, Sarah Marx

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Free Exercise Is A Burden: Protecting "Third Parties" In Religious Accommodation Law, Kara Loewentheil

Kara Loewentheil

During the 2014 U.S. Supreme Court term, the Court considered two challenges to the contraceptive coverage requirement of the Affordable Care Act. These cases attracted enormous attention, and brought a new urgency to the principle that requests for religious accommodations should be weighed against any burdens such accommodations would impose on “third parties,” who are more accurately termed “existing rights-holders.” However, neither courts nor scholars have provided a consistent or principled way of thinking through how to evaluate such burdens and how to weigh them against free exercise rights. This Article takes up that challenge, using the example of the …

Rick Garnett Was In 3 Questions Facing The Supreme Court In Contraception Case Via Abc News On March 20, 2014, Richard Garnett

Richard W Garnett

Rick Garnett was in 3 Questions Facing the Supreme Court in Contraception Case via ABC News on March 20.

Rick Garnett Was Quoted In The New York Times Article Contraception Ruling Could Have Reach Far Beyond Women’S Rights On March 24, 2014, Richard Garnett

Richard W Garnett

Rick was quoted in the New York Times article Contraception Ruling Could Have Reach Far Beyond Women’s Rights on March 24. Richard W. Garnett, a law professor at Notre Dame who filed a brief on the other side, said that overstated matters. “The prediction that a win for Hobby Lobby — a case that is not at all about discrimination or denial of service and instead is about deeply held views regarding the sanctity of life — would be a serious setback for gay rights is, in my view, unfounded,” he said.

Making The Case For Contraception Over Religious Views, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

Morning-After Decisions: Legal Mobilization Against Emergency Contraception In Chile, Fernando Muñoz León

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

In Chile, the Criminal Code bans all forms of abortion. Furthermore, the Constitution—drafted and enacted by the Military Junta led by General Augusto Pinochet—was inspired by a conservative version of Catholic natural law championed by prominent Chilean constitutional law scholars. This Article traces the emergence, development, and ultimately the defeat of a persistent legal mobilization driven by natural law-inspired litigants, politicians, and scholars against levonorgestrel-based emergency contraception, also known as the morning-after pill. In their decade-long efforts at legal mobilization, these natural law litigants used every tool of the Chilean legal system to challenge the legality and the constitutionality of …

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 …