Womenstake, NWLC's Blog

The Supreme Court’s term just came to a close, and thank goodness. A quick look back at the term provides a chilling picture of a new Court that is all too willing to eviscerate important constitutional rights and statutory protections for women. First, there was Gonazales v. Carhart, in which the Court allowed a nationwide ban on a medically approved abortion procedure even though there was no exception permitting the procedure when necessary for a woman’s health, in direct contravention of Roe v. Wade. Then, women in the workplace took a major hit when the Court issued Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., holding that a victim of continuing pay discrimination cannot get into court if she doesn’t complain almost immediately after the discrimination – even if she continues to receive paychecks that are discriminatorily reduced. In a one-two punch, the Court next upheld a Department of Labor regulation that exempted certain home-care providers – a predominantly female and especially minority female workforce – from the Fair Labor Standard Act’s wage and overtime protections in Long Island Care at Home, Ltd. v. Coke. And then, going out with one final bang, the Court yesterday struck down the Seattle and Louisville school districts’ racial integration plans, in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle Sch. Dist. No. 1, putting new limits on the methods schools can use to ensure diversity.

by Jill Morrison

Last week, I was invited to speak to a health law class on religious refusals to provide health care after the professor saw an article on the subject in Self Magazine. While the questions asked by the law students were far more technical and challenging than those I get from a “lay” audience, one thing remained the same: they were shocked that they could be denied critical health care services, information or referrals because of a doctor’s religious beliefs. We depend on doctors to tell us about all our medically and legally available options.  Not everyone knows about things like emergency contraception. Having information withheld feels like a serious violation of our right to bodily autonomy. We have no idea how many women are simply not told of options that are available to them. A recent study showed that 14% of surveyed doctors would withhold options based on their own religious beliefs.

by Joan Entmacher and Karen Schulman

A new report from the Department of Labor demonstrates that there is broad consensus among employers and employees that the Family and Medical Leave Act is a success in helping employees balance work and families.  The report summarizes 15,000 comments submitted in response to a request for information about employees’ and employers’ experiences with the Family and Medical Leave Act.  When the Department initially issued the request, there was concern among FMLA’s supporters that it could be a prelude to an effort to scale back FMLA’s protections.  To make sure that DOL heard from workers and their families, not just employers, advocates put out the word—and thousands responded by sending in their comments and stories to DOL.  It seems to have had an impact—the report highlights the many comments detailing the significant benefits of the FMLA.  The report, however, also emphasizes a number of employers’ concerns, particularly with employees’ use of unscheduled, intermittent leave.  It will be important to continue to monitor what the Department proposes in the wake of this report.