Law Commons^™

Defragging Feminist Cyberlaw, Amanda Levendowski

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In 1996, Judge Frank Easterbrook famously observed that any effort to create a field called cyberlaw would be “doomed to be shallow and miss unifying principles.” He was wrong, but not for the reason other scholars have stated. Feminism is a unifying principle of cyberlaw, which alternately amplifies and abridges the feminist values of consent, safety, and accessibility. Cyberlaw simply hasn’t been understood that way—until now.

In computer science, “defragging” means bringing together disparate pieces of data so they are easier to access. Inspired by that process, this Article offers a new approach to cyberlaw that illustrates how feminist values …

How Does The Us Media Frame Personal Experiences Of Termination Of Pregnancy, Christina Relacion

Student Works

Limited studies have examined the lived experience of those facing termination of pregnancy due to fetal anomaly in the U.S., particularly after the 2022 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. There exists a body of research elsewhere around the world studying how the media frames these experiences, but little is known about the role American media organizations play as health educators for critical reproductive healthcare topics, such as the termination of pregnancy. This critical analysis sought to understand how the U.S. media frames personal accounts of those who have experienced termination of pregnancy due to fetal anomaly, or …

Originalism After Dobbs, Bruen, And Kennedy: The Role Of History And Tradition, Randy E. Barnett, Lawrence B. Solum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In three recent cases, the constitutional concepts of history and tradition have played important roles in the reasoning of the Supreme Court. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization relied on history and tradition to overrule Roe v. Wade. New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen articulated a history and tradition test for the validity of laws regulating the right to bear arms recognized by the Second Amendment. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District looked to history and tradition in formulating the test for the consistency of state action with the Establishment Clause.

These cases raise important questions about …

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 …

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.

(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.

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 …

The Impact Of Us Abortion Policy On Rheumatology Clinical Practice: A Cross-Sectional Survey Of Rheumatologists, Bonnie L. Bermas, Irene Blanco, Rosalind Ramsey-Goldman, Ashira D. Blazer, Megan E.B. Clowse, Cuoghi Edens, Greer Donley, Leslie Pierce, Catherine Wright, Mehret Birru Talabi

Articles

In June of 2022, the US Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health overturned Roe v Wade, finding that there was no federal constitutional right to abortion. Subsequently, almost one third of states have near-total abortion bans in effect. Our team distributed a confidential web-based survey to a sample of US-based rheumatologists to assess how the Dobbs decision is affecting the clinical care of reproductive-age females with rheumatic diseases (RMDs), including teratogen prescribing, pregnancy termination referrals, and rheumatologists’ perceived vulnerability to criminalization.

Preliminary Injunctions In Public Law: The Merits, Kevin J. Lynch

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

The law of preliminary injunctions has been evolving, in many instances away from its roots in equity and towards a more rigid and formalistic approach that raises the bar for when a preliminary injunction may be granted. This change has its roots in hostility at the Supreme Court to certain types of rights, such as abortion, voting rights, public health, and environmental protection, to name a few. In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s 2009 decision in Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, a few circuits have adopted a strict, literal reading of some dicta from that case in order …

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 …

Individual Rights Vs. Collective Value In Paragraph 218: The Role Of Political Tradition In The Development Of German Abortion Policy, Annie Morgan

CISLA Senior Integrative Projects

No abstract provided.

Pro-Choice Plans, Brendan S. Maher

Faculty Scholarship

After Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the United States Constitution may no longer protect abortion, but a surprising federal statute does. That statute is called the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), and it has long been one of the most powerful preemptive statutes in the entire United States Code. ERISA regulates “employee benefit plans,” which are the vehicle by which approximately 155 million people receive their health insurance. Plans are thus a major private payer for health benefits—and therefore abortions. While many post-Dobbs anti-abortion laws directly bar abortion by making either the receipt or provision of …

The Aftermath Of Dobbs: How The Criminalization Of Abortion Has Obstructed The Exercise Of Bodily Autonomy, Sonia Bakshi

Golden Gate University Race, Gender, Sexuality and Social Justice Law Journal

This Blog addresses the topic of bodily autonomy in relation to the criminalization of abortion because everyone should be entitled to the right to make their own choices, especially when it comes to their bodies, and even greater, their selves as a whole. With the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade, the ability to exercise bodily autonomy has never been more obstructed. The Supreme Court has left the nation with the impression that they do not believe women are capable of making decisions about their own bodies or their own futures. Now, it’s important to look into what the ripple …

Privacy: Pre- And Post-Dobbs, Rona Kaufman

Law Faculty Publications

The United States Supreme Court has interpreted the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to include a fundamental right to familial privacy. The exact contours of that right were developed by the Court from 1923 until 2015. In 2022, with its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, the Supreme Court abruptly changed course and held that the right to terminate a pregnancy is no longer part of the right to privacy previously recognized by the Court. This essay seeks to place Dobbs in the context of the Court’s family privacy cases in an effort to understand the Court’s …

Defending The First Premise: Why Prenatal Life Is Not The Exception, Jessica Buchanan

Senior Honors Theses

This thesis frames the abortion debate by dividing the pro-life position into two premises: that the government must protect human beings’ right to life, and that an unborn human organism is a human being. It briefly describes the proposition that the unborn are moral persons. It then proceeds to examine philosophical, legal, and practical objections to the first premise, concluding that if the unborn are established as human beings, the government must uphold their right to life. While this thesis is intended to argue in favor of restricting elective abortion, it does not put forth an opinion on what should …

Policing Pregnancy "Crimes", Valena Beety, Jennifer Oliva

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization held that there is no right to abortion healthcare under the United States Constitution. This Essay details how states prosecuted pregnant people for pregnancy behaviors and speculative fetal harms prior to the Dobbs decision. In this connection, it also identifies two, related post-Dobbs concerns: (1) that states will ramp up their policing of pregnancy behaviors and (2) that prosecutors will attempt to substantiate these charges by relying on invalid scientific evidence. This Essay examines the faulty forensic science that states have used to support fetal harm allegations and reminds …

Equal Protection In Dobbs And Beyond: How States Protect Life Inside And Outside Of The Abortion Context, Reva Siegel, Serena Mayeri, Melissa Murray

All Faculty Scholarship

In two paragraphs at the beginning of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Supreme Court rejected the Equal Protection Clause as an alternative ground for the abortion right. As the parties had not asserted an equal protection claim on which the Court could rule, Justice Alito cited an amicus brief we co-authored demonstrating that Mississippi’s abortion ban violated the Equal Protection Clause, and, in dicta, stated that precedents foreclosed the brief’s arguments. Yet, Justice Alito did not address a single equal protection case or argument on which the brief relied. Instead, he cited Geduldig v. Aiello, a 1974 case …

Originalism: Erasing Women From The Body Politic, Malinda L. Seymore

Faculty Scholarship

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, the Court relied on originalism to excise women from the Constitution. Originalism is purposefully backward-looking. With cherry-picked history, the Court created a future that looks to the past: a past where unwed pregnancy is shameful and can be redeemed only by secret adoption. Yet the case has revealed originalism as a flawed method, harmed the legitimacy of the Court, and energized those supporting abortion rights.

Roe And The Original Meaning Of The Thirteenth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

The current debate over Roe v. Wade as a substantive due process right has prompted scholars to investigate alternative sources for a constitutional right to abortion. One approach argues that the Thirteenth Amendment’s prohibition on “slavery” and “involuntary servitude” prohibits the government from denying women the right to terminate a pregnancy. Scholars making this argument con-cede that the right to abortion was not the expected application of the Thirteenth Amendment but insist that a forced continued pregnancy falls within the original meaning of the Amendment’s terms.

Thinly Rooted: Dobbs, Tradition, And Reproductive Justice, Darren L. Hutchinson

Faculty Articles

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. These two cases held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment encompassed a right of women to terminate a pregnancy. Roe reflected over 60 years of substantive due process precedent finding and reaffirming a constitutional right of privacy with several animating themes, including bodily integrity, equality, and dignity. The Court’s substantive due process doctrine had established that the analysis in such cases would involve multiple points of inquiry, such as tradition, contemporary practices, and …

Freedom Not To See A Doctor: The Path Toward Over-The-Counter Abortion Pills, Lewis Grossman

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

American courts and lawmakers are engaged in an epic struggle over the fate of abortion pills. While some anti-abortion activists are attempting to drive the pills off the market entirely, supporters of reproductive rights are striving to make them more easily accessible. This Article advances the latter mission with a bold proposal: FDA should consider allowing abortion pills to be sold over the counter (OTC). Abortion rights supporters argue that FDA should repeal the special distribution and use restrictions it unnecessarily imposes on mifepristone, one of two drugs in the medication abortion regimen. Even if FDA removed these restrictions, however, …

Situating Dobbs, Paula A. Monopoli

Faculty Scholarship

The recent decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health has been characterized as an outlier because its effect is to erase a previously recognized constitutional right. This paper situates Dobbs in a broader feminist constitutional history. It asks if this retrenchment is really such a unique turn in American jurisprudence when it comes to protections or “rights” that matter most to women’s lived experience. The paper argues that if one opens the aperture of constitutional history to embrace a more capacious view of rights, those afforded to women have often been eroded or erased by state legislatures, Congress, and courts. …

Dobbs In A Technologized World: Implications For Us Data Privacy, Jheel Gosain, Jason D. Keune, Michael S. Sinha

All Faculty Scholarship

In June of 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, overturning 50 years of precedent by eliminating the federal constitutional right to abortion care established by the Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade. The Dobbs decision leaves the decision about abortion services in the hands of the states, which created an immediately variegated checkerboard of access to women’s healthcare across the country. This in turn laid bare a profusion of privacy issues that emanate from our technologized world. We review these privacy issues, including healthcare data, financial data, website tracking and …

Abortion Pills, David S. Cohen, Greer Donley, Rachel Rebouché

Articles

Abortion is now illegal in roughly a third of the country, but abortion pills are more widely available than ever before. Though antiabortion advocates and legislators are attacking pills with all manner of strategies, clinics, websites, and informal networks are openly facilitating the distribution of abortion pills, legally and illegally, across the United States. This Article is the first to explain this defining aspect of the post-Roe environment and the novel issues it raises at the level of state law, federal policy, and on-the-ground advocacy.

This Article first details antiabortion strategies to stop pills by any means necessary. These tactics …

Abortion Localism And Preemption In A Post-Roe Era, Kaitlin A. Caruso

Faculty Publications

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Supreme Court eliminated federal constitutional protections for abortion in the United States, overruling Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. That ruling returned much regulation of abortion to state control. But it will also accelerate a longstanding trend: municipal abortion regulation. And in the current world of local government law, increased local activity brings with it the question of state preemption. This article is the first to bring together the history and trends in local abortion policy with intrastate preemption doctrine to fully canvass the post-Roe local abortion …

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 …

Out Of Bounds?: Abortion, Choice Of Law, And A Modest Role For Congress, Susan Frelich Appleton

Scholarship@WashULaw

This invited contribution to a symposium on the multiple intersections of family law and constitutional law grapples with the emerging problems of jurisdictional competition and choice of law in interstate abortion situations in the wake of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization—as abortion-hostile states seek to impose restrictions beyond their borders and welcoming states seek to become havens for abortion patients, regardless of their domicile. Grounded in a conflict-of-laws perspective, the essay lays out the interstate abortion chaos invited by Dobbs and the threat to our federal system that it presents, given Congress’s failure to codify a national right to …

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 …

Abortion—A Question Of Human Rights, Geoffrey J. Bennett, Christina M. Lyon

Journal Articles

Unlike the American Supreme Court which has been prepared to acknowledge, confront, and attempt to resolve the many problems associated with abortion, the European Commission of Human Rights in two cases that have only recently been reported has disappointingly side-stepped many of the difficult issues involved, and raised more questions than it answers. Furthermore, the reasoning in these decisions, which are concerned with the interpretation of several of the Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, is at times vague and curiously ill-argued. The two decisions are first a German case, Bruggeman and Scheuten v Federal Republic of Germany …