Posted on July 13, 2012 |
This Supreme Court Term presented both a significant victory and significant setbacks for women’s rights. The victory, although qualified: the Court’s 5-4 decision upholding the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Women’s rights advocates and people across the country continue to celebrate this landmark decision upholding a law that offers critical protections for women’s health and economic security. But while it ruled that the law is constitutional, the Court limited the penalties the federal government can impose if a state refuses to participate in the expansion of the Medicaid program set forth in the ACA, meaning that some states may not expand Medicaid. Further, Chief Justice Roberts’ opinion, particularly when read in conjunction with the stinging joint dissent signed by Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito, raises questions about the Court’s future Commerce Clause and Spending Clause jurisprudence and may invite further constitutional challenges to important social programs.
With all of the commentary and intrigue surrounding the Court’s blockbuster release of the ACA decision on the last day of the Term, it bears remembering that other decisions this Term implicated women’s rights – and dealt women significant setbacks. In Coleman v. Maryland, the Court ruled that state employees do not have full redress for violations of some provisions of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The Court also decided that certain employees may not bring employment discrimination claims against their religious employers, because to do so would burden those employers’ First Amendment rights. These decisions not only limited women’s legal rights, but in so doing, reinforce the concern, raised by decisions like Wal-Mart v. Dukes, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, and Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., that women suffer greatly from the Court’s disinclination to protect the rights of individuals seeking justice under law.
The Court has already agreed to hear cases addressing race-conscious admissions, protections against sexual harassment on the job, and, potentially, marriage equality, next Term. The Court is thus poised to issue rulings addressing the scope of individuals’ rights that will be of significant importance to women. Women will be watching the decisions that the Supreme Court will hand down in the 2012-2013 Term. For more details on those cases and this Term’s decisions, read the Center’s complete analysis: Supreme Court Review: 2011-2012 Term.
Articles by Topic
Join the New Reproductive Health Campaign
Go to ThisIsPersonal.org to get the facts and tools you need to help protect women's reproductive health.
Blogroll
How You Can Help
Sign Up for Email Updates
Follow Us on the Web
Comments
Way to Protect & Promote Women's Health & Rights
Dear Senior Counsel Amy K. Matsui: I sent the following e-mail to Debra Ness with copies to Cecile Richards and Karen Davenport. I have reason to believe that none of them received it. Could you please review it and see if you can coordinate it with those three wonderful ladies? The e-mail in its entirety follows:
From: Tom Caracciolo
To: Debra Ness
CC: Cecile Richards ; Karen Davenport
Sent: Tuesday, July 10,2012 1:13 PM
Subject: Way to Protect and Promote
Dear Debra:
The way to protect and promote women's health (and rights) is set forth in the below copy of the e-mail I sent to Karen Davenport yesterday; and to Cecile Richards today. Karen is a Director at the National Women's Health Center. Please do coordinate with her on the substance of the e-mail below.
Dear Karen:
In the way of introduction, a short idea of who and what I am: A 78 year young grandfather married to the same wonderful woman for the past 56 years. The glue that held us together is honest to goodness mutual respect for one another in addition to real love. I just retired last November and my wife and I have been blessed with grandchildren that very often give us much joy. We truly are enjoying our twilight years.
I just signed your letter to my Rep in Congress to oppose repealing the health care law. Inasmuch as I am pretty much an activist that has been pushing for alternative fuels for the past six years it occurred to me that you and your associates and followers may find it very advantageous to sign my petition that I recently published.
I will insert the link to my petition below. But I first want to mention that the reason I believe you and your organization will want to sign it is because women eligible to vote outnumber the men eligible to vote in our United States. A substantial number of signatures petitioning for the Amendment (described in my petition) could very well progress to voting for passage by our Congress. I feel that if most women notified their US Congressman and Senators, the Amendment would be approved.
With the Amendment approved, you and others would have equal access to our members of Congress with out having to contribute to their campaign fund. Even taking them to lunch would not be expected. Lobbyists would not have any more influence than you. As a matter of fact, your vote to keep them in office would easily out weigh any corporation's lobbyist.
Please view the petition at http://signon.org/sign/take-money-out-of-politics and let me know what you think.
Very truly yours,
Tom Caracciolo
2007 Cay Way
Anacortes, Washington 98221
anacortesrealtor@comcast.net
Tel (360) 293-8927
Fax (360) 293-3074
Outgoing mail scanned by Norton Anti-Virus for your protection.
Post new comment