Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Reclaiming Access To Truth In Reproductive Healthcare After National Institute Of Family & Life Advocates V. Becerra, Diane Kee
Michigan Law Review
Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs) are antiabortion organizations that seek to “intercept” people with unintended pregnancies to convince them to forego abortion. It is well documented that CPCs intentionally present themselves as medical professionals even when they lack licensure, while also providing medically inaccurate information on abortion. To combat the blatant deception committed by CPCs, California passed the Reproductive FACT Act in 2015. The Act required CPCs to post notices that disclosed their licensure status and informed potential clients that the state provided subsidized abortion and contraceptives. Soon after, CPCs brought First Amendment challenges to these disclosure requirements, claiming that the …
Redefining Reproductive Rights And Justice, Leah Litman
Redefining Reproductive Rights And Justice, Leah Litman
Michigan Law Review
Review of Reproductive Rights and Justice Stories edited by Melissa Murray, Katherine Shaw, and Reva B. Siegel.
Abortion Talk, Clare Huntington
Abortion Talk, Clare Huntington
Michigan Law Review
Review of Carol Sanger's About Abortion: Terminating Pregnancy in Twenty-First-Century America.
Life's Sacred Value—Common Ground Or Battleground, Alexander Morgan Capron
Life's Sacred Value—Common Ground Or Battleground, Alexander Morgan Capron
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Life's Dominion: An Argument About Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom by Ronald Dworkin
The Abortion-Funding Cases And Population Control: An Imaginary Lawsuit (And Some Reflections On The Uncertain Limits Of Reproductive Privacy), Susan Frelich Appleton
The Abortion-Funding Cases And Population Control: An Imaginary Lawsuit (And Some Reflections On The Uncertain Limits Of Reproductive Privacy), Susan Frelich Appleton
Michigan Law Review
Two issues are before us today: (I) the meaning of the term "medically necessary" in a public hospital's charter and (II) the constitutionality of state action that provides free medical treatment to indigent pregnant women seeking an abortion but denies them such assistance for prenatal care and childbirth. On the basis of recent Supreme Court authority, we find that such action violates neither the hospital's charter nor the United States Constitution.