Law Commons^™

Introduction: Securing Reproductive Justice After Dobbs, Aziza Ahmed, Nicole Huberfeld, Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

When we conceptualized this symposium, Roe v. Wade¹ was still the law of the land, albeit precariously. We aimed to commemorate its fiftieth anniversary by exploring historical, legal, medical, and related dimensions of access to abortion as well as the challenges ahead to secure reproductive justice. With the leak of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization on May 2, 2022, we shifted to mark the dawn of a new era. In the nearly identical official opinion announced on June 24, 2022,² Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority (6-3), overturned Roe and …

(Re)Criminalizing Abortion: Returning To The Political With Stories, George J. Annas

Faculty Scholarship

Abortion stories have always played a powerful role in advancing women’s rights. In the abortion sphere particularly, the personal is political. Following the Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade, abortion politics, and abortion storytelling, take on an even deeper political role in challenging the bloodless judicial language of Dobbs with the lived experience of women.

Continuous Reproductive Surveillance, Michael Ulrich, Leah R. Fowler

Faculty Scholarship

The Dobbs opinion emphasizes that the state’s interest in the fetus extends to “all stages of development.” This essay briefly explores whether state legislators, agencies, and courts could use the “all stages of development” language to expand reproductive surveillance by using novel developments in consumer health technologies to augment those efforts.

Dobbs V. Jackson Women’S Health: Undermining Public Health, Facilitating Reproductive Coercion, Aziza Ahmed, Dabney P. Evans, Jason Jackson, Benjamin Mason Meier, Cecília Tomori

Faculty Scholarship

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health continues a trajectory of U.S. Supreme Court jurisprudence that undermines the normative foundation of public health — the idea that the state is obligated to provide a robust set of supports for healthcare services and the underlying social determinants of health. Dobbs furthers a longstanding ideology of individual responsibility in public health, neglecting collective responsibility for better health outcomes. Such an ideology on individual responsibility not only enables a shrinking of public health infrastructure for reproductive health, it facilitates the rise of reproductive coercion and a criminal legal response to pregnancy and abortion. This commentary …

Femtechnodystopia, Leah R. Fowler, Michael Ulrich

Faculty Scholarship

Reproductive rights, as we have long understood them, are dead. But at the same time history seems to be moving backward, technology moves relentlessly forward. Femtech products, a category of consumer technology addressing an array of “female” health needs, seem poised to fill gaps created by states and stakeholders eager to limit birth control and abortion access and increase pregnancy surveillance and fetal rights. Period and fertility tracking applications could supplement or replace other contraception. Early digital alerts to missed periods can improve the chances of obtaining a legal abortion in states with ever-shrinking windows of availability or prompt behavioral …

Employer-Sponsored Reproduction, Valarie Blake, Elizabeth Mccuskey

Faculty Scholarship

This Article interrogates the current and future role of employer-sponsored health insurance in reproductive choice, revealing the magnitude of impact that employers’ insurance coverage choices have on Americans’ access to reproductive care, as well as the legal infrastructure that prioritizes employer choice over individual autonomy.

Over half the population depends on employers for health insurance. The laws regulating those plans grant employers discretion in what services to cover, with exceptionally wide latitude for employers’ choices about reproductive care services, like abortion, contraception, infertility, and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). In their role as health care funders, employers pursue their own economic interests, …

Ordered Liberty After Dobbs, Linda C. Mcclain, James E. Fleming

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay explores the implications of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization for the future of substantive due process (SDP) liberties protecting personal autonomy, bodily integrity, familial relationships (including marriage), sexuality, and reproduction. We situate Dobbs in the context of prior battles on the Supreme Court over the proper interpretive approach to deciding what basic liberties the Due Process Clause (DPC) protects. As a framing device, we refer to two competing approaches as “the party of [Justice] Harlan or Casey” versus “the party of Glucksberg.” In Dobbs, the dissent co-authored by Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan represents the party of …

Family Needs, Family Leave In 2023, Katharine B. Silbaugh

Faculty Scholarship

Instituting support for women and children is a difficult task to imagine in a world that is removing reproductive freedom and healthcare. In this hypothetical, do we treat the removal of abortion care as a force majeure, natural disaster, or an earthquake? If so, after the earthquake, the community bands together and works tirelessly to compensate for what has happened. But the removal of abortion care was not a natural disaster-it was planned, and it is embedded in background conditions that are pushing further away from support for women and children.

The primary task of this Article is to respond …

Trust, Brutality, And Human Dignity: How “Partial Birth Abortion” Helps Shape American Biopolitics, George J. Annas

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, I explore how nearly continuous public rhetorical challenges to abortion in the political realm first led the public and the courts to turn away from a particular abortion procedure (intact dilation and extraction, also known as partial-birth abortion) which political agitators labeled as “barbaric” and then to view physicians who performed abortions not as legitimate professionals, but simply as “abortionists,” and sometimes as evil “Frankensteins.” “Abortionists” use no “medical judgment” and are unworthy of deference by state legislatures, Congress, or the courts when deciding how or when to perform an abortion. The concentration on the welfare of …

A Critique Of Expertise For Health Law, Aziza Ahmed

Faculty Scholarship

A health justice approach requires a progressive critique of expertise. This article considers two recent high-profile cases – the mask mandate and medication abortion -- to understand how we should think the mobilization of expertise in the context of public health law. Following from this, the article offers news ways to better understand how to think of the relationship between health law, expertise, and politics.

Shifting Standards Of Judicial Review During The Coronavirus Pandemic In The United States, Wendy K. Mariner

Faculty Scholarship

Emergencies are exceptions to the rule. Laws that respond to emergencies can create exceptions to rules that protect human rights. In long lasting emergencies, these exceptions can become the rule, diluting human rights and eroding the rule of law. In the United States, the COVID-19 pandemic prompted states to change rules governing commercial and personal activities to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. Many governors’ executive orders were challenged as violations of the constitutionally protected rights of those affected. Judges are deciding whether emergencies can justify more restrictions than would be permitted in normal circumstances and whether some rights deserve …

The Future Of Facts: The Politics Of Public Health And Medicine In Abortion Law, Aziza Ahmed, Jason Jackson

Faculty Scholarship

While a great deal of public scrutiny has focused on how information circulates through online outlets including Twitter and Facebook, less attention has been devoted to how more traditional institutions traffic in factual assertions for the sake of setting a particular distributional agenda into motion.[1] Of these more traditional institutions, courts play a central role in legitimating legal and factual claims in the process of applying and clarifying legal rules. In public health-related adjudication, courts play at least two important roles: first, judges and juries make decisions between competing sets of public health and medical claims and second, courts …

Floating Lungs: Forensic Science In Self-Induced Abortion Prosecutions, Aziza Ahmed

Faculty Scholarship

Pregnancy that ends in stillbirth or late miscarriage—particularly where a person gives birth outside of a hospital—raises the specter of criminal behavior. To successfully prosecute a person for the death of a child, however, requires proving that the child was born alive. Prosecutors mobilize forensic science as an objective way to determine life. This Essay focuses on one such forensic method: the hydrostatic lung test (“HLT”), also known as the floating lung test (“FLT”). Although there are debates about the “correct” way to perform the exam, in essence, the test requires that a forensic scientist take pieces of the lung …

How The Covid-19 Response Is Altering The Legal And Regulatory Landscape On Abortion, Aziza Ahmed

Faculty Scholarship

The CARES Act, a two trillion-dollar stimulus bill designed to fund the response to COVID-19 and address the many economic shortfalls created by the pandemic, offered the first arena for Democrats and Republicans to bring questions of abortion access into the COVID-19 response. Republicans successfully pushed for the application of the abortion restrictions to CARES Act funding vis-à-vis the Hyde Amendment. The Hyde Amendment was passed in 1976 as part of an appropriations bill and has been passed as a rider every year since. It prevents federal dollars from being used to access abortions except in cases where the life …

Abortion In A Post-Truth Moment: A Response To Erwin Chemerinsky And Michele Goodwin, Aziza Ahmed

Faculty Scholarship

In Abortion: A Woman’s Private Choice, Erwin Chemerinsky and Michele Goodwin respond to the crisis of abortion rights in our current political moment. While preserving the right to abortion is an ongoing challenge for reproductive-justice advocates and lawyers, the arrival of a new Republican administration led by Donald Trump and a Republican majority in the House and Senate heightens these concerns. In the face of ongoing and new threats to abortion access, Chemerinsky and Goodwin argue that abortion should be treated as a woman’s private choice. I agree with Chemerinsky and Goodwin, as all supporters of abortion rights should. …

Informed Decision Making On Abortion: Crisis Pregnancy Centers, Clinics, And The First Amendment, Aziza Ahmed

Faculty Scholarship

Shifting laws and regulations increasingly displace the centrality of women's health concerns in the provision of abortion services. This is exemplified by the growing presence of deceptive Crisis Pregnancy Centers alongside new informed consent laws designed to dissuade women from seeking abortions. Litigation on informed consent is further complicated in the clinical context due to the increased mobilization of facts - such as the gestational age or sonogram of the fetus - delivered with the intent to dissuade women from accessing abortion. In other words, factual information utilized for ideological purpose. To preserve a woman's autonomy and decision-making capacity, there …

Informed Consent And The First Amendment, Wendy K. Mariner, George J. Annas

Faculty Scholarship

For more than two decades, states have been adding to the things that physicians must say and do to obtain “informed consent” — and thereby testing the constitutional limits of states' power to regulate medical practice. In 1992, the Supreme Court upheld states' authority to require physicians to provide truthful information that might encourage a woman to reconsider her decision to have an abortion, finding that such a requirement did not place an “undue burden” on the woman.

With Liberty And Access For Some: The Aca's Disconnectfor Women's Health, Nicole Huberfeld

Faculty Scholarship

The ACA denies to women the "basic security" of providing insurance for a procedure that statistics show one in three women will need during their reproductive lifetime. On one hand, the access-enhancing elements of the ACA are likely to help women, who earn lower wages, need more medical care, and live longer than men, to gain access to preventive and regular healthcare and to keep the insurance that they have. On the other hand, poor women and women of color will lose ground in access to abortion, because the ACA prevents insurance payment for abortions through both public and private …

The Supreme Court And Abortion Rights, George J. Annas

Faculty Scholarship

Since the Supreme Court's landmark 1973 abortion-rights decision in Roe v. Wade, the law has taken the lead in defining the contours of the continuing public debate over reproductive liberty. Ever since then, abortion opponents have tried to make abortion more burdensome by limiting Roe, and these continuing challenges are the reason there have been so many Supreme Court decisions about abortion, including the Court's 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, which unexpectedly reaffirmed the core of Roe.

“Partial-Birth Abortion” And The Supreme Court, George J. Annas

Faculty Scholarship

Aortion has long been, and remains, the most politicized medical procedure in the United States. It has been the subject of more state and federal legislation than all other medical procedures combined. The U.S. Supreme Court, which almost never hears cases about medical procedures, has regularly heard cases over the past 25 years concerning the constitutionality of various state laws designed to limit abortion. Thus, it was only a matter of time before the Court would hear a case on the constitutionality of laws restricting so-called partial-birth abortion. When the Court heard a challenge to Nebraska's law, statutes relating to …

The Limits Of Law At The Limits Of Life: Lessons From Cannibalism, Euthanasia, Abortion, And The Court-Ordered Killing Of One Conjoined Twin To Save The Other, George J. Annas

Faculty Scholarship

The subject is law at the beginning and end of life. Most of my work is in the area of general health law: law and medicine, public health law, and health and human rights. But this is my favorite subject area, and I expect you to ask me the hardest questions you can. I am not saying I can answer them, but if I cannot that is my fault, not yours. I am going to make a pretty broad argument today about law and medicine; specifically about how new medical technology and medical practice standards have eclipsed religion (and sometimes …

Partial-Birth Abortion, Congress, And The Constitution, George J. Annas

Faculty Scholarship

The political debate over abortion during the past 25 years has shifted among various dichotomous views of the world: life versus choice, fetus versus woman, fetus versus baby, constitutional right versus states' rights, government versus physician, physician and patient versus state legislature. Hundreds of statutes and almost two dozen Supreme Court decisions on abortion later, the core aspects of Roe v. Wade, 1 the most controversial health-related decision by the Court ever, remain substantially the same as they were in 1973. Attempts to overturn Roe in both the courtroom and the legislature have failed. Pregnant women still have a constitutional …

The Politics Of Human-Embryo Research: Avoiding Ethical Gridlock, George J. Annas

Faculty Scholarship

[...]abortion is about more than politics; it is fundamentally about ethics, morals, equality, and religion, and how we think about abortion reveals much about how we are likely to think about other life-and-death issues in contemporary American medical practice. Because politics as currently practiced seems so unprincipled, there have been sporadic attempts to redefine abortion-related issues as ethical questions and to set up national panels and advisory groups to examine various practices and make recommendations about their ethics.

The Supreme Court's Narrow View On Civil Rights, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

The right to choose abortion, although recently significantly curtailed from its original scope,' is a federally protected liberty interest of women, and is at least protected against the imposition of "undue burdens" by state and local government.² Some of the most serious threats to women's ability to choose abortion have come not from government regulation, but from private, national, organized efforts to prevent abortions. In addition to seeking change through the political system, some of these organizations, most notably Operation Rescue, have focused on the providers of abortion, and have attempted to prevent abortions by forcibly closing abortion clinics …

Restricting Doctor–Patient Conversations In Federally Funded Clinics, George J. Annas

Faculty Scholarship

We have come to accept, as a matter of both law and medical ethics, that open and honest discussion is crucial to the doctor–patient relationship. We accordingly deplore the practice in Plato's Greece whereby, for slaves, "verbal communication between healer and patient was reduced to a minimum." But restricting conversation between doctor and patient has now become a matter of government policy, again distinguishing patients according to economic class.

Pregnancy, Drugs, And The Perils Of Prosecution, Wendy K. Mariner, Leonard H. Glantz, George J. Annas

Faculty Scholarship

In the war on drugs an offensive has been launched against pregnant women who use drugs. Over the past four years, prosecuting attorneys have been indicting women who use drugs while pregnant. In South Carolina alone, eighteen women who allegedly took drugs during pregnancy were indicted last summer for criminal neglect of a child or distribution of drugs to a minor.' In the only successful prosecution so far, Jennifer Johnson was convicted in Florida for delivering illegal drugs to a minor via the umbilical cord in the moment after her child was born and before the cord was clamped.^{2 …}

The Politics Of Transplantation Of Human Fetal Tissue, George J. Annas

Faculty Scholarship

Research involving human fetal tissue has been the subject of intense political debate in this country for almost two decades, and the use of fetal tissues in transplantation continues this controversy in another forum. Since Roe v. Wade ,1 the landmark decision on abortion by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973, the federal government has focused public attention on fetal research by creating panels of experts. "3 This conclusion was accepted on a vote of 15 to 2, and included recommendations that the decision to abort be kept independent of the decision to retrieve and use fetal tissue, that recipients …