As more courts recognize a patient’s privacy rights to make end-of-life health-care decisions, it’s become clear that what courts characterize as “fundamental rights” don’t apply to pregnant people.
Friday’s order may prevent the Obama administration from enforcing the contraception mandate against the Little Sisters of the Poor, but it also may have just won the administration’s case.
The law, which reinstated restrictions lifted by the Obama administration, violates the state’s “single-subject” rule.
Despite the fact that New Jersey promotes maternal methadone programs, state officials want to charge women who use methadone while pregnant with child abuse.
The Roberts Court may be skeptical of buffer zones around abortion clinics, but the rest of the country doesn’t seem to be.
Conservatives have been turning up the volume on the irrational, unevidenced claim that poverty is caused by not being married. In reality, poverty is caused by not having enough money. This should be obvious, but it clearly needs to be said more often.
The 2-1 ruling requires crisis pregnancy centers to disclose whether they have licensed medical providers at their facilities.
According to the court, the 2011 law violates abortion providers’ free speech rights.
Forty-one years since Roe v. Wade, the question is: Will the Roberts Court do to Roe and abortion rights what it did to health-care reform and keep just enough of it intact to call it legal, while rendering it nearly impossible to obtain?
In a series of complaints, the National Women’s Law Center claims four insurance companies are charging women more for long-term care policies, and states are complicit in the discrimination.