United States https://reproductiverights.org/taxonomy/term/127/all en New Tool Shows State of Abortion Law and Abortion Access Across America https://reproductiverights.org/press-room/new-tool-shows-state-abortion-law-and-abortion-access-across-america <span>New Tool Shows State of Abortion Law and Abortion Access Across America </span> <span><span lang="" about="/user/81" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">ehorwitz</span></span> <span>Fri, 11/22/2019 - 10:23</span> <div class="field field--name-field-new-ty field--type-entity-reference field--label-visually_hidden"> <h2 class="field__label visually-hidden">News Type</h2> <div class="field__item"><a href="/press-room/press-releases" hreflang="en">Press Releases</a></div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-subhead field--type-string field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Subhead</div> <div class="field__item">Center for Reproductive Rights comprehensive digital map shows the ‘No Roe Reality’ of abortion laws, restrictions,and protections on the books - including those laws currently blocked by the courts </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-primary-content field--type-entity-reference-revisions field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Primary Content</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"> <div class="paragraph paragraph--type--text paragraph--view-mode--default"> <div class="field field--name-field-formatted-text field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><span><span><span><span>(<span>PRESS RELEASE) – Today, the </span></span></span><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/"><span><span><span><span>Center for Reproductive Rights</span></span></span></span></a><span><span><span> unveiled a new and improved digital tool, </span></span></span><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/what-if-roe-fell"><em><span><span><span><span>What if Roe Fell</span></span></span></span></em></a><em><span><span><span>, </span></span></span></em><span><span><span>showing the current state of abortion access across the United States, including the 5 most populous U.S. territories and the District of Columbia.  If the Supreme Court limits or overturns <em><span>Roe v. Wade</span></em></span></span></span><span><span>, abortion access would be at risk in almost one-half of U.S. states. The new tool shows that abortion access is challenging in many parts of the U.S. due to state restrictions.</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span><span>For the first time in three years, the tool has been overhauled to add new search features so users can sort states based on the types of bans, restrictions, and protections in place in each state. Not only is this the most comprehensive digital map on abortion access currently available, it showcases the importance of the courts that have permanently prevented many abortion bans and restrictions from going into effect as well as those laws currently on hold as the Center and other organizations challenge the laws in state and federal courts.</span></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>“<em><span>What if Roe Fell</span></em> shows the devastating landscape of abortion access if Roe is weakened or overturned,” said Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “We have analyzed the laws and constitutional protections of every state. This tool is a call to action to pass state and federal laws protecting abortion rights and abortion access.”</span></span><br />  </span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>This one-of-a-kind interactive digital map provides an overview of current abortion bans, restrictions, and protections across the country, including:</span></span></span></span></p> <ul><li><span><span><span><span><span>Trigger bans – abortion bans that could be triggered if the federal right is overturned</span></span></span></span></span></li> <li><span><span><span><span><span>Abortion bans broken down by the number of weeks of pregnancy</span></span></span></span></span></li> <li><span><span><span><span><span>7 kinds of restrictions targeting specifically abortion providers (facility requirements, admitting privileges, etc.)</span></span></span></span></span></li> </ul><p><span><span><span><span>The Center’s new map shows the state of abortion access in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the five most populous U.S. territories:</span></span></span></span></p> <ul><li><span><span><span><strong><span><span>7 states have</span></span></strong><span><span> <strong><span>expanded access to abortion care and protect abortion rights under state law</span></strong>: California, Connecticut, Hawaii, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington.</span></span></span></span></span></li> <li><span><span><span><strong><span><span>14 states</span></span></strong><span><span> <strong><span>protect abortion rights under state law:</span></strong> Alaska, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, and Rhode Island</span></span></span></span></span></li> <li><span><span><span><strong><span><span>8 states/district/territories</span></span></strong><span><span> <strong><span>where</span></strong> <strong><span>abortion is not protected under state, district or territory law</span></strong>: Colorado, District of Columbia, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Virginia, and Wyoming.</span></span></span></span></span></li> <li><span><span><span><strong><span><span>24 states/territories that are hostile to abortion</span></span></strong><span><span>: Alabama, American Samoa, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Guam, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, the Northern Mariana Islands, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin</span></span></span></span></span></li> </ul><p><span><span><span><span>The map also shows laws are on the books that are currently on hold due to litigation as well as laws that have been blocked from going into effect.</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><em><span><span>What If Roe Fell</span></span></em><span><span> also includes a glossary of terms commonly used in abortion conversations, as well as a comprehensive history of abortion access across the U.S. since the Supreme Court’s decision on <em><span>Roe </span></em>in 1973. </span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>###</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><strong><span><span><span>MEDIA CONTACT:</span></span></span></strong><span><span><span> Kelly Krause; </span></span></span><a href="mailto:kkrause@reprorights.org"><span><span>kkrause@reprorights.org</span></span></a><span><span><span>; 917-637-3649  </span></span></span></span></span></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-related-content field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/what-if-roe-fell" hreflang="en">What If Roe Fell?</a></div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-issue field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Issues</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/abortion" hreflang="en">Abortion</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-region field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Regions</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-regions/united-states" hreflang="en">United States</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-work field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Work</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-work/reporting-on-rights" hreflang="en">Reporting on Rights</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> Fri, 22 Nov 2019 15:23:39 +0000 ehorwitz 58801 at https://reproductiverights.org District Court Opinion - County of Santa Clara v. HHS https://reproductiverights.org/document/court-opinion-county-santa-clara-v-hhs <span>District Court Opinion - County of Santa Clara v. HHS</span> <div class="field field--name-field-case-document-type field--type-entity-reference field--label-visually_hidden"> <h2 class="field__label visually-hidden">Case Document Type</h2> <div class="field__item"><a href="/document/court-opinions-orders" hreflang="en">Court Opinions &amp; Orders</a></div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <span><span lang="" about="/user/81" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">ehorwitz</span></span> <span>Wed, 11/20/2019 - 10:24</span> <div class="field field--name-field-cases field--type-entity-reference field--label-above"> <h2 class="field__label">Cases</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/case/country-santa-clara-vs-hhs" hreflang="en">County of Santa Clara v. HHS</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-file-upload field--type-file field--label-visually_hidden crr-upload"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">File Upload</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><span class="file file--mime-application-pdf file--application-pdf"><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/2019-11/OCR%20Order.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=128016" title="OCR Order.pdf">Opinion - County of Santa Clara v. HHS</a></span> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-issue field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Issues</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/other-barriers" hreflang="en">Other Barriers</a></div> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/other-barriers-0" hreflang="en">Other Barriers</a></div> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/maternal-health" hreflang="en">Maternal Health</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-region field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Regions</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-regions/united-states" hreflang="en">United States</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-work field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Work</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-work/in-the-courts" hreflang="en">In the Courts</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> Wed, 20 Nov 2019 15:24:18 +0000 ehorwitz 58800 at https://reproductiverights.org California District Court Joins other Federal Courts in Vacating the Trump Administration’s “Denial of Care” Rule in Full https://reproductiverights.org/press-room/denial-of-care-rule-struck-down <span>California District Court Joins other Federal Courts in Vacating the Trump Administration’s “Denial of Care” Rule in Full</span> <span><span lang="" about="/user/81" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">ehorwitz</span></span> <span>Tue, 11/19/2019 - 10:00</span> <div class="field field--name-field-new-ty field--type-entity-reference field--label-visually_hidden"> <h2 class="field__label visually-hidden">News Type</h2> <div class="field__item"><a href="/press-room/press-releases" hreflang="en">Press Releases</a></div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-primary-content field--type-entity-reference-revisions field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Primary Content</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"> <div class="paragraph paragraph--type--text paragraph--view-mode--default"> <div class="field field--name-field-formatted-text field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><span><span><strong><span><span>(PRESS RELEASE) </span></span></strong><span><span>Today, a California federal judge became the third judge in the U.S. to strike down the Trump Administration’s Denial of Care rule in its entirety. U.S. District Judge William Alsup also upheld the third party standing of reproductive rights physicians to bring cases on behalf of their patients and applied that doctrine to cover physicians bringing claims on behalf of LGBTQ patients, explaining that the rights of physicians and plaintiffs in these contexts are closely intertwined.  </span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>The vacated rule would empower an immensely broad array of healthcare workers, including receptionists and ambulance drivers, to turn away and refuse to serve patients based on moral or religious grounds. Patients seeking services like contraception, abortion, or gender affirming care would be most impacted by the rule. The lawsuit was filed by the County of Santa Clara, the </span></span><span><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/"><span>Center for Reproductive Rights</span></a><span>, Lambda Legal, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and Mayer Brown LLP.</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>In his ruling, Judge Alsup wrote: </span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><strong><span><span>“The New Rule sets forth new definitions of statutory terms that conflict with the statutes themselves—expansive definitions that would upset the balance drawn by Congress between protecting conscientious objectors versus facilitating the uninterrupted provision of health care to Americans.”</span></span></strong></span></span></p> <p><span><span><strong><span><span>“Under the rule, a clerk scheduling surgeries for an operating room could refuse to reserve slots for abortions and sterilizations. So could an employee who merely sterilizes and places surgical instruments or ensures that the supply cabinets in the operating room are fully stocked in preparation for an abortion. For the reasons already stated, the Church Amendment was never intended to apply to those who have no role in the actual performance of the abortion or sterilization. Neither those who schedule abortions nor those who prepare an operating room assist in the performance of such a procedure under the Church Amendment.”</span></span></strong></span></span></p> <p><span><span><strong><span><span>“Doctors and their patients have a confidential relationship, especially when it comes to asserting rights related to invasive procedures and treatments. Furthermore, most of the medical procedures at issue here such as abortions, gender-affirming surgery, and HIV treatments cannot be safely secured without the aid of a physician.  The rights of the individual physician plaintiffs and their patients here are thus closely intertwined.” </span></span></strong></span></span></p> <p><span><span><strong><span><span>“For the foregoing reasons, this order holds the rule is “not in accordance with law,” by reason of conflict with the underlying statutes and is in conflict with the balance struck by Congress in harmonizing protection of conscience objections vis-a-vis the uninterrupted flow of health care to Americans. When a rule is so saturated with error, as here, there is no point in trying to sever the problematic provisions. The whole rule must go.”</span></span></strong></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>Earlier this month, federal judges in New York and Washington also vacated the entire rule in separate cases. Dozens of states, municipalities, providers, and advocacy groups have challenged the rule through various lawsuits around the country. The lawsuits emphasize that this confusing policy would incentivize health care providers to eliminate reproductive healthcare and LGBTQ care altogether, leaving millions across the country without access to critical health care, including in regions that might otherwise prioritize maintaining access to this essential care.  The Rule is especially dangerous because it has no emergency exception.</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>“We are grateful the Court recognized the unchecked discrimination against women and LGBTQ patients that could occur under this rule, even in medical emergencies,” said <strong>Genevieve Scott, Senior Staff Attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights.</strong> “Discrimination in any context is egregious, but allowing someone’s religious or moral views to effectively veto a patient’s medical choice could have deadly consequences. It is out of line with any reasonable understanding of law or medical ethics that a receptionist, who is not directly involved in providing medical care, could turn away patients, or that an EMT could refuse to transport a patient with a life-threatening ectopic pregnancy.”</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>The Denial of Care Rule was issued in May by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and it applies to virtually every kind of healthcare provider.  Health care facilities risk losing all federal funding if they do not grant employees carte blanche to deny information and services.   Because the Rule is infeasible to implement, if allowed to go into effect, it would coerce many health care facilities to eliminate reproductive healthcare and LGBTQ healthcare, leaving millions across the United States without access to critical healthcare.</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>Plaintiffs in the case include the County of Santa Clara, which runs an extensive health and hospital system that serves as a safety-net provider for the county’s 1.9 million residents; the health providers Bradbury-Sullivan LGBT Community Center in Allentown, Pa., Center on Halsted in Chicago, Hartford GYN in Connecticut, Los Angeles LGBT Center, Mazzoni Center in Philadelphia, Trust Women Seattle and Whitman-Walker Health in Washington, D.C.; the associations AGLP, GLMA and Medical Students for Choice; and five doctors.</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>###</span></span></span></span></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-cases field--type-entity-reference field--label-above"> <h2 class="field__label">Cases</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/case/country-santa-clara-vs-hhs" hreflang="en">County of Santa Clara v. HHS</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-related-content field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/document/court-opinion-county-santa-clara-v-hhs" hreflang="en">District Court Opinion - County of Santa Clara v. HHS</a></div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-issue field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Issues</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/abortion" hreflang="en">Abortion</a></div> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/other-barriers" hreflang="en">Other Barriers</a></div> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/access-quality-care" hreflang="en">Access to Quality Care</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-region field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Regions</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-regions/united-states" hreflang="en">United States</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-work field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Work</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-work/in-the-courts" hreflang="en">In the Courts</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> Tue, 19 Nov 2019 15:00:24 +0000 ehorwitz 58799 at https://reproductiverights.org Serving those who serve issue brief - Restrictions on abortion access for servicemembers, veterans, and their dependents https://reproductiverights.org/document/serving-those-who-serve-issue-brief-restrictions-abortion-access-servicemembers-veterans <span>Serving those who serve issue brief - Restrictions on abortion access for servicemembers, veterans, and their dependents</span> <div class="field field--name-field-publication-document-type field--type-entity-reference field--label-visually_hidden"> <h2 class="field__label visually-hidden">Publication Document Type</h2> <div class="field__item"><a href="/document/books-reports" hreflang="en">Books &amp; Reports</a></div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <span><span lang="" about="/user/81" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">ehorwitz</span></span> <span>Mon, 11/18/2019 - 16:55</span> <div class="field field--name-field-primary-content field--type-entity-reference-revisions field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Primary Content</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"> <div class="paragraph paragraph--type--text paragraph--view-mode--default"> <div class="field field--name-field-formatted-text field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p>Servicemembers, veterans &amp; their families face abortion bans and prohibitions on insurance coverage when trying to access these legal medical services. This issue brief addresses the unique barriers individuals insured under the military health insurance program (TRICARE) or obtaining healthcare through the Veterans Health Association face in accessing abortion services, including the many institutional, financial and logistical barriers they must overcome.<br /><br /> Federal law prohibits the Department of Defense from providing abortion services at military treatment facilities, and the TRICARE insurance program from covering such services, except when a pregnancy is the result of rape, incest or when the life of the pregnant person is at risk. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA), which provides health services to veterans, does not provide or pay for abortion services under any circumstances.<br /><br /> “I am a member of the armed forces currently serving in Afghanistan. I am here with my husband and was unaware that the pills I take to prevent malaria can counteract my birth control pills. My husband is as shocked as I am. We do not want a child now; we have a job to do here. Due to the military’s no-abortion policy, I am pretty desperate. It isn’t like you can even go off base here, and you can’t just say you need medical leave without saying why.”<br /><br /> “I found out I was pregnant in the months leading up to my deployment and didn’t feel comfortable telling my doctor or chain of command for fear of retribution. I took a day of liberty after finally talking to my chief about it, he was nice but it was incredibly uncomfortable and later on he told the entire chiefs’ mess about it.” <br /><br /> This issue brief is the first in a series on reproductive health care access for servicemembers, veterans and their families.</p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-file-upload field--type-file field--label-visually_hidden crr-upload"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">File Upload</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><span class="file file--mime-application-pdf file--application-pdf"><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/documents/Serving%20Those%20Who%20Serve_Abortion%20Access.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=468314" title="Serving Those Who Serve_Abortion Access.pdf">Restrictions on abortion access for servicemembers, veterans, and their dependents</a></span> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-issue field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Issues</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/legal-restrictions-0" hreflang="en">Legal Restrictions</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-region field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Regions</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-regions/united-states" hreflang="en">United States</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-work field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Work</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-work/engaging-policymakers" hreflang="en">Engaging Policymakers</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> Mon, 18 Nov 2019 21:55:00 +0000 ehorwitz 58798 at https://reproductiverights.org Serving Those Who Serve https://reproductiverights.org/document/serving-those-who-serve_ <span>Serving Those Who Serve</span> <div class="field field--name-field-document-type field--type-entity-reference field--label-visually_hidden"> <h2 class="field__label visually-hidden">Document Type</h2> <div class="field__item"><a href="/document/briefing-papers" hreflang="en">Briefing Papers</a></div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <span><span lang="" about="/user/511" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">eugena@defmethod.io</span></span> <span>Fri, 11/15/2019 - 16:28</span> <div class="field field--name-field-primary-content field--type-entity-reference-revisions field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Primary Content</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"> <div class="paragraph paragraph--type--text paragraph--view-mode--default"> <div class="field field--name-field-formatted-text field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p>Servicemembers, veterans &amp; their families face abortion bans and prohibitions on insurance coverage when trying to access these legal medical services. This issue brief addresses the unique barriers individuals insured under the military health insurance program (TRICARE) or obtaining healthcare through the Veterans Health Association face in accessing abortion services, including the many institutional, financial and logistical barriers they must overcome.<br /><br /> Federal law prohibits the Department of Defense from providing abortion services at military treatment facilities, and the TRICARE insurance program from covering such services, except when a pregnancy is the result of rape, incest or when the life of the pregnant person is at risk. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA), which provides health services to veterans, does not provide or pay for abortion services under any circumstances.<br /><br /> “I am a member of the armed forces currently serving in Afghanistan. I am here with my husband and was unaware that the pills I take to prevent malaria can counteract my birth control pills. My husband is as shocked as I am. We do not want a child now; we have a job to do here. Due to the military’s no-abortion policy, I am pretty desperate. It isn’t like you can even go off base here, and you can’t just say you need medical leave without saying why.”<br /><br /> “I found out I was pregnant in the months leading up to my deployment and didn’t feel comfortable telling my doctor or chain of command for fear of retribution. I took a day of liberty after finally talking to my chief about it, he was nice but it was incredibly uncomfortable and later on he told the entire chiefs’ mess about it.” <br /><br /> This issue brief is the first in a series on reproductive health care access for servicemembers, veterans and their families.<br />  </p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-file-upload field--type-file field--label-visually_hidden crr-upload"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">File Upload</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><span class="file file--mime-application-pdf file--application-pdf"><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/2019-11/Serving%20Those%20Who%20Serve_Abortion%20Access.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=468314">Serving Those Who Serve_Abortion Access.pdf</a></span> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-issue field--type-entity-reference field--label-above"> <h2 class="field__label">Issues</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/abortion" hreflang="en">Abortion</a></div> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/legal-restrictions-0" hreflang="en">Legal Restrictions</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-region field--type-entity-reference field--label-above"> <h2 class="field__label">Regions</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-regions/united-states" hreflang="en">United States</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-work field--type-entity-reference field--label-above"> <h2 class="field__label">Work</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-work/engaging-policymakers" hreflang="en">Engaging Policymakers</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> Fri, 15 Nov 2019 21:28:33 +0000 eugena@defmethod.io 58795 at https://reproductiverights.org New Abortion Lawsuit Seeks to Expand Access in Oklahoma https://reproductiverights.org/press-room/new-abortion-lawsuit-seeks-expand-access-oklahoma <span>New Abortion Lawsuit Seeks to Expand Access in Oklahoma</span> <span><span lang="" about="/user/81" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">ehorwitz</span></span> <span>Fri, 11/08/2019 - 13:56</span> <div class="field field--name-field-new-ty field--type-entity-reference field--label-visually_hidden"> <h2 class="field__label visually-hidden">News Type</h2> <div class="field__item"><a href="/press-room/press-releases" hreflang="en">Press Releases</a></div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-subhead field--type-string field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Subhead</div> <div class="field__item">New case highlights telemedicine and advanced practice clinicians as avenues to increasing abortion access </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-primary-content field--type-entity-reference-revisions field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Primary Content</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"> <div class="paragraph paragraph--type--text paragraph--view-mode--default"> <div class="field field--name-field-formatted-text field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><span><span><span><span><span>(</span></span></span><span><span><span>PRESS RELEASE) </span></span></span><span lang="EN" xml:lang="EN" xml:lang="EN"><span><span>—</span></span></span><span><span><span> Today, the </span></span></span><span><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/"><span>Center for Reproductive Rights</span></a><span><span> filed <a href="https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/2019-11/PLD.2019-11-08.PETITION.pdf">a lawsuit</a> challenging two anti-abortion laws in Oklahoma, both of which are medically unnecessary and limit access to abortion care. </span></span>This is the sixth lawsuit the Center for Reproductive Rights has filed against Oklahoma in five years.</span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span><span>The laws being challenged in this case are:</span></span></span></span></span></p> <ul><li><span><span><span><strong><span><span><span>Telemedicine Ban:</span></span></span></strong><span><span><span> This Oklahoma law bans abortion providers from using telemedicine to provide medication abortion (abortion by pills). </span></span></span><span lang="EN" xml:lang="EN" xml:lang="EN"><span><span>Medication abortion has been approved by the FDA since 2000 and is extremely safe—the serious complication rate is less than one-half of one percent, whether provided in-person or by telemedicine. Telemedicine expands access to safe and legal health care.</span></span></span></span></span></span></li> <li><span><span><span><strong><span><span><span>“Physician-Only Law”:</span></span></span></strong><span><span><span> This Oklahoma law bans advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) from providing abortion care, </span></span></span><span lang="EN" xml:lang="EN" xml:lang="EN"><span><span>despite the fact that APRNs can provide early abortion care with the same safety and efficacy as physicians. For this reason, sixteen other states already authorize APRNs to provide early abortion care. Major medical organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Public Health Association and the World Health Organization have concluded that laws prohibiting APRNs from providing early abortion services are medically unfounded. </span></span></span></span></span></span></li> </ul><p><span><span><span>“If we get these senseless laws off the books, we can expand abortion access in Oklahoma, which has very few abortion providers,” said <strong><span>Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights</span></strong>. “As clinics shutter across the country, telemedicine is a crucial way to keep services available.”</span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span lang="EN" xml:lang="EN" xml:lang="EN"><span><span>“Telemedicine helps reduce some of the barriers our patients face when accessing abortion care in Oklahoma,” said <strong><span>Julie Burkhart, Founder and CEO of Trust Women</span></strong>. “It is a critical component of health care delivery. Telemedicine would increase the available days that qualified practitioners are able to provide abortion care. It will certainly decrease the wait time for our patients. Reproductive access in Oklahoma is scarce; therefore, striking the physician-only law and the telemedicine ban will bring equality to more people in Oklahoma.”</span></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span>Currently, <a href="https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/medication-abortion"><span>18 states</span></a> have laws that require physicians to be physically present when providing pills for medication abortion. “Physician-only” laws are currently on the books in 34 states. The Center is challenging telemedicine bans in Arizona and Kansas, and physician-only laws in Arizona, Montana, and Virginia. The Montana Supreme Court has preliminarily allowed licensed advanced practice registered nurses to provide abortion care while the case continues at a lower court. </span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span>Other Oklahoma cases filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights have challenged the following laws:</span></span></span></p> <ul><li><span><span><span><span>A ban on the<span><span> standard method of abortion after approximately 14 weeks of pregnancy</span></span>—known as Dilation &amp; Evacuation—which was temporarily <a href="https://reproductiverights.org/press-room/oklahoma-supreme-court-steps-block-abortion-ban-after-rogue-ruling">blocked</a> earlier this week by the Oklahoma Supreme Court. The same case also challenges a law forcing patients to wait 72 hours before they can obtain an abortion.</span></span></span></span></li> <li><span><span><span><span>A law forcing doctors to tell patients that medication abortion can be "reversed"—a false claim unsupported by scientific evidence. This law was temporarily <a href="https://reproductiverights.org/press-room/court-blocks-oklahoma-law-violates-doctors-free-speech">blocked</a> last month by a state district court. </span></span></span></span></li> <li><span><span><span><span>A law that that restricted a woman’s access to medication abortion, which was permanently <a href="https://reproductiverights.org/press-room/oklahoma-court-strikes-down-restrictions-on-medication-abortion">struck down</a> by the Oklahoma Supreme Court in April 2019.</span></span></span></span></li> <li><span><span><span><span>An<span><span> omnibus measure that </span></span>would have imposed four different new abortion restrictions, including subjecting abortion providers to warrantless searches. This was permanently <a href="https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/documents/BurnsvCline_Oklahoma_SupremeCourt_Decision.pdf">blocked</a> by the Oklahoma Supreme court in October 2016.</span></span></span></span></li> <li><span><span><span><span>A law preventing doctors from providing abortions unless they had admitting privileges at a local hospital. This law was permanently <a href="https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/documents/burns-v-cline-ok-supreme-court.pdf">blocked</a> by the Oklahoma Supreme Court in December 2016.</span></span></span></span></li> </ul><p><span><span><span>You can read the full complaint for this case [<a href="https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/2019-11/PLD.2019-11-08.PETITION.pdf">HERE</a>]. This case was filed by Emily Nestler, T.J. Tu, and Kirby Tyrrell from the Center for Reproductive Rights along with co-counsel Patterson Belknap Webb &amp; Tyler LLP and local counsel Blake Patton from Walding &amp; Patton PLLC. Plaintiffs in the case are Trust Women Oklahoma City, Dr. Colleen McNicholas, and Bridget Van Treese, an advanced practice registered nurse. </span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span>##</span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><strong><span>MEDIA CONTACT:</span></strong> Nora Franco, <a href="mailto:nfranco@reprorights.org">nfranco@reprorights.org</a>, 609-964-6759</span></span></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-issue field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Issues</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/abortion" hreflang="en">Abortion</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-region field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Regions</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-regions/united-states" hreflang="en">United States</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-work field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Work</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-work/in-the-courts" hreflang="en">In the Courts</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> Fri, 08 Nov 2019 18:56:09 +0000 ehorwitz 58789 at https://reproductiverights.org Petition - Trust Women Oklahoma City v. Hunter https://reproductiverights.org/document/petition-trust-women-oklahoma-city-v-hunter <span>Petition - Trust Women Oklahoma City v. Hunter</span> <div class="field field--name-field-case-document-type field--type-entity-reference field--label-visually_hidden"> <h2 class="field__label visually-hidden">Case Document Type</h2> <div class="field__item"><a href="/document/court-filings-pleadings-motions-briefs" hreflang="en">Court Filings: Pleadings, Motions &amp; Briefs</a></div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <span><span lang="" about="/user/81" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">ehorwitz</span></span> <span>Fri, 11/08/2019 - 13:35</span> <div class="field field--name-field-file-upload field--type-file field--label-visually_hidden crr-upload"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">File Upload</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><span class="file file--mime-application-pdf file--application-pdf"><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/2019-11/PLD.2019-11-08.PETITION.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=1455410" title="PLD.2019-11-08.PETITION.pdf">Petition - Trust Women Oklahoma City v. Hunter</a></span> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-issue field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Issues</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/abortion" hreflang="en">Abortion</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-region field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Regions</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-regions/united-states" hreflang="en">United States</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-work field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Work</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-work/in-the-courts" hreflang="en">In the Courts</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> Fri, 08 Nov 2019 18:35:30 +0000 ehorwitz 58788 at https://reproductiverights.org Oklahoma Supreme Court Steps in to Block Abortion Ban After Rogue Ruling https://reproductiverights.org/press-room/oklahoma-supreme-court-steps-block-abortion-ban-after-rogue-ruling <span>Oklahoma Supreme Court Steps in to Block Abortion Ban After Rogue Ruling</span> <span><span lang="" about="/user/81" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">ehorwitz</span></span> <span>Mon, 11/04/2019 - 16:41</span> <div class="field field--name-field-new-ty field--type-entity-reference field--label-visually_hidden"> <h2 class="field__label visually-hidden">News Type</h2> <div class="field__item"><a href="/press-room/press-releases" hreflang="en">Press Releases</a></div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-subhead field--type-string field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Subhead</div> <div class="field__item">Court issues order temporarily blocking a ban on the standard method of abortion after 14 weeks of pregnancy</div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-primary-content field--type-entity-reference-revisions field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Primary Content</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"> <div class="paragraph paragraph--type--text paragraph--view-mode--default"> <div class="field field--name-field-formatted-text field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><span><span><strong><span>(Press Release)</span></strong><span> — Today, the Oklahoma Supreme Court granted an emergency request to block the state’s ban on <span><span>the standard method of abortion after approximately 14 weeks of pregnancy. The </span></span></span><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/"><span><span><span>Center for Reproductive Rights</span></span></span></a> <span><span><span>asked the state’s high court to step in after </span></span></span><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/press-room/oklahoma-court-goes-rogue-upholds-abortion-ban"><span><span><span>an Oklahoma state trial court</span></span></span></a><span><span><span> upheld the ban earlier this year, becoming the first court in the country to uphold such a law. The ban was passed in 2015 and has never gone into effect.</span></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span><span>“Today’s decision means Oklahomans can continue receiving high-quality, evidence-based abortion care,” said Autumn Katz, Senior Counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights and lead counsel on this case. “Under this law, doctors would be subject to criminal penalties for providing abortions consistent with the standard of care. This ban was motivated by politics, not medicine, and the Oklahoma Supreme Court recognized that today.” </span></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span><span>Doctors who violate the ban could face up to two years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Major medical organizations, including the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)</span></span></span><a href="http://www.acog.org/About-ACOG/News-Room/Statements/2015/ACOG-Statement-Regarding-Abortion-Procedure-Bans"><span><span><span> oppose</span></span></span></a><span><span><span> these types of bans, noting: “These restrictions represent legislative interference at its worst: doctors will be forced, by ill-advised, unscientifically motivated policy, to provide lesser care to patients. This is unacceptable.”</span></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span><span>Similar bans have been struck down in Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Kentucky, and Texas. </span></span></span><span>Just this summer, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand a federal appellate court’s decision finding an identical ban in Alabama unconstitutional.</span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span><span>Only four health centers provide abortion services in Oklahoma. In addition to the laws challenged in this suit, Oklahoma has passed many other abortion restrictions, including: laws requiring parental involvement for minors; a ban on the use of telemedicine to prescribe pills for medication abortion; a mandatory 72-hour delay; and restrictions on when private, public, and state health insurance plans can cover abortion care. The Center is currently challenging </span></span></span><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/press-room/court-blocks-oklahoma-law-violates-doctors-free-speech"><span><span><span>another Oklahoma law</span></span></span></a><span><span><span> that forces doctors to inform patients without any medical basis that medication abortion can be “reversed.” The law was temporarily blocked late last month.</span></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span><span>The case was filed in 2015 by the Center for Reproductive Rights and Walding &amp; Patton PLLC on behalf of Tulsa Women’s Reproductive Clinic.</span></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span><span>### </span></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><strong><span><span><span>MEDIA CONTACT:</span></span></span></strong><span><span><span> Nora Franco, </span></span></span><a href="mailto:nfranco@reprorights.org"><span><span><span>nfranco@reprorights.org</span></span></span></a><span><span><span>, 609-964-6759</span></span></span></span></span></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-cases field--type-entity-reference field--label-above"> <h2 class="field__label">Cases</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/case/nova-health-systems-v-cline-et-al" hreflang="en">Nova Health Systems v. Cline et al.</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-issue field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Issues</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-issues/legal-restrictions-0" hreflang="en">Legal Restrictions</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-region field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Regions</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-regions/united-states" hreflang="en">United States</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-work field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Work</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-work/in-the-courts" hreflang="en">In the Courts</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> Mon, 04 Nov 2019 21:41:13 +0000 ehorwitz 58786 at https://reproductiverights.org Civil Rights Groups and the County of Santa Clara Urge Court to Block HHS Denial of Care Rule https://reproductiverights.org/press-room/civil-rights-groups-and-county-santa-clara-urge-court-block-hhs-denial-care-rule <span>Civil Rights Groups and the County of Santa Clara Urge Court to Block HHS Denial of Care Rule</span> <span><span lang="" about="/user/81" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">ehorwitz</span></span> <span>Wed, 10/30/2019 - 16:32</span> <div class="field field--name-field-new-ty field--type-entity-reference field--label-visually_hidden"> <h2 class="field__label visually-hidden">News Type</h2> <div class="field__item"><a href="/press-room/press-releases" hreflang="en">Press Releases</a></div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-subhead field--type-string field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Subhead</div> <div class="field__item">Patients’ Lives at Risk if Trump Administration Rule Goes into Effect Nov. 22</div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-primary-content field--type-entity-reference-revisions field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Primary Content</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"> <div class="paragraph paragraph--type--text paragraph--view-mode--default"> <div class="field field--name-field-formatted-text field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><span><span><strong><span><span>(PRESS RELEASE) </span></span></strong><span><span>– Today, the Center for Reproductive Rights, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Lambda Legal, and the County of Santa Clara argued before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California that the Trump administration’s Denial of Care Rule should be ruled unlawful and blocked from taking effect. The organizations, along with pro bono counsel Mayer Brown LLP, are representing myriad health care providers and medical professionals, as co-plaintiffs with the County, in the lawsuit <em><span>County of Santa Clara v. HHS</span></em>.</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>The Denial of Care Rule, which was issued in May by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and is scheduled to take effect next month, invites any health care worker – including doctors, nurses, EMTs, administrators, janitors and clerical staff – to deny medical treatment, information and services to patients because of personal religious or moral beliefs. Health care facilities risk losing essential federal funding if they do not grant employees carte blanche to deny services. Because the rule is confusing and infeasible to implement, many health care facilities will likely be forced to eliminate services such as reproductive and LGBTQ care, leaving millions across the United States without access to critical health care.</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>Today, the civil rights organizations and the County argued that HHS exceeded its authority and arbitrarily and capriciously failed to consider the rule’s potential harm to patients and the health care system, in violation of the federal Administrative Procedure Act. They also argued that the rule is unconstitutional because it advances specific religious beliefs in violation of the First Amendment; violates patients’ rights to privacy, liberty and equal dignity as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment; and chills patients’ speech and expression in violation of the First Amendment, all to the detriment of patients’ health and well-being.</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>“This policy invites unprecedented discrimination against healthcare recipients at hospitals and other healthcare facilities across the country – HHS has said it is acceptable for a receptionist to refuse a patient care or for an EMT to refuse to transport a patient with a life-threatening ectopic pregnancy,” said <strong><span>Genevieve Scott, senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights. </span></strong>“What’s more, hospitals and other healthcare facilities throughout the country will likely be coerced into eliminating abortion care, trans care, and other critical services to avoid loss of government funding that they depend upon to keep their doors open.”</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>“We have less than a month before patients nationwide may be denied care because of someone else’s religious beliefs. This is about health – for ourselves, our children, our grandparents, our communities. No one should be denied medical treatment because of who they are, who they love or what they believe,” said <strong><span>Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United</span></strong>. “The Denial of Care rule violates our nation’s fundamental promise of religious freedom – that we are all free to believe or not believe, so long as we don’t harm others. It is the definition of harming others when you refuse to provide health care to those in need. The court should recognize the danger this rule poses to everyone and block it from ever taking effect.”</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>“For more than five months this rule has hung over women, LGBTQ people, religious minorities, and other already marginalized and vulnerable populations, threatening at any moment to cut them off from critical and in some cases life-saving care,” <strong><span>Lambda Legal Senior Attorney Jamie Gliksberg</span></strong> said. “Our attorneys today made it transparently clear to the court just how devastating implementation of this rule will be, and we look forward to the court issuing a ruling that the facts overwhelmingly support.”</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>“The argument today confirms that the rule has no legal or common sense basis and, if implemented, will undermine emergency services and medical care for the County’s nearly 2 million residents,” said <strong><span>James R. Williams, Santa Clara County Counsel</span></strong>. “The Trump Administration is purposefully stoking fear among already vulnerable communities and increasing barriers to critical health care. We are committed to healthcare for all—and that is why we will continue working to ensure this unlawful rule is blocked.”</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>The lawsuit’s plaintiffs include the County of Santa Clara, which runs an extensive health and hospital system that serves as a safety-net provider for the county’s 1.9 million residents; the health providers Bradbury-Sullivan LGBT Community Center in Allentown, Pa., Center on Halsted in Chicago, Hartford GYN in Connecticut, Los Angeles LGBT Center, Mazzoni Center in Philadelphia, Trust Women Seattle and Whitman-Walker Health in Washington, D.C.; the associations AGLP, GLMA and Medical Students for Choice; and five doctors.</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span><span><a href="https://www.au.org/sites/default/files/2019-05/County%20of%20Santa%20Clara%20v.%20HHS%205.28.19.pdf">The lawsuit is available here</a>.</span></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span>###</span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span> </span></span></p> <p><span><span><strong><span><span>PRESS CONTACTS:</span></span></strong><br /><strong><span><span><strong><span>Center for Reproductive Rights</span></strong></span></span></strong><span><span>, Geraldine Henrich-Koenis, 202-524-5538, <a href="mailto:ghenrichkoenis@reprorights.org"><span>ghenrichkoenis@reprorights.org</span></a></span></span><br /><strong><span><span>Americans United for Separation of Church and State</span></span></strong><span><span>, Tali lsraeli or Liz Hayes, 202-466-3234, <a href="mailto:media@au.org"><span>media@au.org</span></a></span></span><br /><strong><span><span>Lambda Legal</span></span></strong><span><span>, Tom Warnke, 213-841-4503, <a href="mailto:twarnke@lambdalegal.org"><span>twarnke@lambdalegal.org</span></a></span></span><br /><strong><span><span>County of Santa Clara</span></span></strong><span><span>, Alex Butcher-Nesbitt, 603-707-6153, <a href="mailto:abutchernesbitt@mercuryllc.com"><span>abutchernesbitt@mercuryllc.com</span></a></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><em><span><span>Founded in 1992, the </span></span></em><span><span><a href="https://reproductiverights.org/"><em><strong><span><span>Center for Reproductive Rights</span></span></strong></em></a><em><span> is a global legal advocacy organization dedicated to advancing reproductive health and autonomy. The Center’s groundbreaking court cases have expanded access to safe abortion, birth control and maternal healthcare in the U.S. and across the globe.</span></em></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span><a href="https://www.au.org/"><em><strong><span><span>Americans United for Separation of Church and State</span></span></strong></em></a><em><span> is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.</span></em></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span><a href="https://www.lambdalegal.org/"><em><strong><span><span>Lambda Legal</span></span></strong></em></a><em><span> is a national organization committed to achieving full recognition of the civil rights of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, transgender people and everyone living with HIV through impact litigation, education and public policy work.</span></em></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><em><span><span>The government of the </span></span></em><span><span><a href="https://www.sccgov.org/sites/scc"><em><strong><span><span>County of Santa Clara</span></span></strong></em></a><em><span> serves a diverse, multi-cultural population of 1.9 million residents – more populous than 14 states. With a $8.1 billion annual budget, dozens of departments and agencies, and over 20,000 employees, the County provides essential services to its residents, including public health protection, environmental stewardship, medical services through the County of Santa Clara Health System, child and adult protection services, homelessness prevention and solutions, roads, park services, libraries, emergency response to disasters, protection of minority communities and those under threat, access to a fair criminal justice system, and many others.</span></em></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span> </span></span></p> <p><span><span> </span></span></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-region field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Regions</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-regions/united-states" hreflang="en">United States</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-work field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Work</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-work/in-the-courts" hreflang="en">In the Courts</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> Wed, 30 Oct 2019 20:32:11 +0000 ehorwitz 58785 at https://reproductiverights.org Center for Reproductive Rights Announces Creative Council led by Elizabeth Banks https://reproductiverights.org/press-room/center-reproductive-rights-announces-creative-council-led-elizabeth-banks <span>Center for Reproductive Rights Announces Creative Council led by Elizabeth Banks</span> <span><span lang="" about="/user/81" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">ehorwitz</span></span> <span>Tue, 10/29/2019 - 15:25</span> <div class="field field--name-field-new-ty field--type-entity-reference field--label-visually_hidden"> <h2 class="field__label visually-hidden">News Type</h2> <div class="field__item"><a href="/press-room/press-releases" hreflang="en">Press Releases</a></div> </div> <br class="clear" /> <div class="field field--name-field-subhead field--type-string field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Subhead</div> <div class="field__item">Actors, producers, directors, artists, and cultural icons to join forces to champion reproductive rights access in the United States and around the world</div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-primary-content field--type-entity-reference-revisions field--label-visually_hidden"> <div class="field__label visually-hidden">Primary Content</div> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"> <div class="paragraph paragraph--type--text paragraph--view-mode--default"> <div class="field field--name-field-formatted-text field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><span><span><span>(Press Release) The Center for Reproductive Rights, a <span><span>global human rights organization, and </span></span>Elizabeth Banks, actor, director and producer, today announced the creation of the <em>Center for Reproductive Rights Creative Council</em> -- a new initiative to harness the power of the creative community to advance reproductive rights as fundamental human rights around the world. The group will leverage their platforms, reach, and cultural influence to raise the profile of the Center’s cases and issues to educate the public and advocate for change on sexual reproductive health and rights.</span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span>“Deciding whether or when to become a parent is one of the most important life decisions we can make. It’s not a decision someone can make for anyone else,” said <strong>Elizabeth Banks, chair of the Center for Reproductive Rights Creative Council</strong>. “And, yet, anti-abortion politicians seek to pass extreme bans in the hope of reversing over 45 years of precedent to take away one of our constitutional rights. As a creative community, we will fight to keep abortion legal and accessible in the United States and work to elevate the critical role the Center for Reproductive Rights is playing in protecting our fundamental human rights around the world.” </span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span>The Creative Council was formally announced on Monday evening at the Center for Reproductive Rights’ annual Gala in New York City, which raised over $2 million to support the Center’s work. Photos of select Creative Council members from the Gala are available <a href="https://assignments.gettyimages.com/mm/nicePath/gyipa_public?nav=pr652254612"><span>here</span></a>.  </span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span>The Center for Reproductive Rights Creative Council includes chair <strong>Elizabeth Banks</strong>, as well as founding members <strong>Amy Brenneman</strong>, actor and producer; <strong>Lisa Edelstein</strong>, actor, producer, writer, and director; <strong>Sarah Jones</strong>, <span>Tony-winning playwright/performer and producer</span>; <strong>Aja Naomi King</strong>, actor; <strong>Cindi Leive</strong>, journalist and former editor-in-chief of <em>Glamour</em>; <strong>Carol Lim and Humberto Leon</strong>, co-founders of Opening Ceremony; <strong>Busy Philipps</strong>, actor and <em>New York Times</em> best-selling author; and <strong>Erika Savage</strong>, lawyer and executive at Morphe Cosmetics.</span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span>“The Center for Reproductive Rights is proud to partner with these powerful artists to protect and expand reproductive rights access across the globe through our work in the courts, in public policy, and before human rights bodies,” said <strong>Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights</strong>. “We know the impact these artists can have in advocating for change and reaching new audiences to raise awareness about reproductive rights issues, including maternal health, abortion care, contraception, and assisted reproduction.” </span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span>Over the next several months, they will be focused on the Center’s U.S. Supreme Court case, <em>June Medical Services v. Gee</em>, which challenges a Louisiana law designed to shut down clinics and undermine our guaranteed right to access abortion care. This law is identical to a Texas law the U.S. Supreme Court declared unconstitutional that the Center litigated just three years ago in <em>Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt</em>. If the Supreme Court allows this law to stand,<em> </em>all of Louisiana’s clinics would close except one, leaving one doctor to provide abortion services for nearly a million women across the state, putting abortion care completely out of reach. </span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><strong><span lang="EN" xml:lang="EN" xml:lang="EN">About the Center for Reproductive Rights</span></strong></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span><span lang="EN" xml:lang="EN" xml:lang="EN">The Center for Reproductive Rights uses the power of law to advance reproductive rights as fundamental human rights around the world. Headquartered in New York City, the non-profit, non-partisan organization has regional offices in Bogota, Geneva, Kathmandu, Nairobi, and Washington, DC. Since its founding in 1992, the Center has been involved in every major abortion rights case argued before the U.S. Supreme Court including winning the Court’s most recent case <em>Whole Woman’s Health vs. Hellerstedt</em> in 2016. This year, just three years after that victory, the Center is back at the Supreme Court fighting to preserve that win and the constitutional guarantee of the right to abortion in <em>June Medical Services v. Gee.  </em></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span><span><span>###</span></span></span></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-region field--type-entity-reference field--label-inline"> <h2 class="field__label">Regions</h2> <div class="field__items"> <div class="field__item"><a href="/our-regions/united-states" hreflang="en">United States</a></div> </div> </div> <br class="clear" /> Tue, 29 Oct 2019 19:25:59 +0000 ehorwitz 58783 at https://reproductiverights.org