The National Women’s Law Center in supports the Leahy Comprehensive Substitute Amendment to the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act (S. 178). Please see below for the full PDF'd letter demonstrating our support.
King v. Burwell is the latest Supreme Court case to challenge the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The case focuses on the financial help, in the form of tax credits, provided to low and moderate-income individuals and their families — the majority of whom are women — to make monthly health insurance premiums more affordable. The Court will determine whether individuals and families will continue to receive these tax credits to help purchase insurance in the federally-facilitated health insurance Marketplaces.
The National Women’s Law Center and law firm Hogan Lovells submitted an amicusbrief on behalf of 68 organizations in the Supreme Court case, King v. Burwell, brought by plaintiffschallenging a core provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The Court will consider whether the ACA allows the federal government to provide subsidies to individuals and families who buy insurance from the federally-facilitated health insurance Marketplaces, also known as Exchanges. The brief argues that a ruling for the challengers in King would thwart one of the main objectives of the law: to make health insurance more affordable and thus attainable for millions of Americans.
State legislators in 2014 continued to enact laws that restrict access to abortion or ban it outright. During the year, 15 states adopted 26 new restrictions that limit access to abortion.These state restrictions are a dangerous overreach into women’s personal medical decisions.
The federal laws that withhold insurance coverage of abortion from qualified women threaten women’s health and well-being. These restrictions, commonly known as “the Hyde Amendment,” particularly harm low-income women and women of color. These restrictions must be overturned so that a woman has the insurance coverage she needs to make a real decision about whether or not to end a pregnancy.
Recognizing that when women succeed, their families and the economy prosper, some legislative leaders are taking action to create opportunities for women in the workplace. The National Women’s Law Center applauds these efforts because investment in women’s economic security is vital for women and their families.
Thirty-eight leading groups in the movements for LGBT equality, reproductive freedom, and freedom of religion and belief stand united in opposition to congressional interference with D.C. laws that protect D.C. employees and students from discrimination at work and at school.
Representative Diane Black (R-TN) and Representative Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) have introduced resolutions that would disapprove two District of Columbia laws recently passed by the D.C. Council. The disapproval resolutions – H.J. Res. 43 and 44 – would block laws aimed at protecting women and their families and LGBT students in the District of Columbia from harsh discrimination at work and school.
Across the country, employers are using their religious beliefs to discriminate against their employees because they disagree with their employees’ personal reproductive health care decisions. Women are being punished, threatened, or fired for using birth control, for undergoing in vitro fertilization in order to get pregnant, or for having sex without being married. It is unfair that a person would be fired or discriminated against because of a decision about whether to prevent pregnancy or start a family.
Employers should not be allowed to use their personal religious beliefs to discriminate against employees, who typically come from all different faiths. Fortunately, states have begun to step forward to protect employees, introducing legislation to make it clear that bosses cannot obstruct or coerce an employee when that employee makes a personal reproductive health care decision.
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) makes historic strides for women’s health and economic security but is once again under attack. The ACA provides tax credits to help low and moderate income individuals and families purchase health insurance – many of whom are women. In the 2014-2015 term, the Supreme Court will review King v. Burwell, a case challenging this core provision of the ACA. The Court will determine whether the ACA allows the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to provide these subsidies to individuals and families who purchase insurance from the federally-facilitated health insurance Exchanges. The decision will have a significant impact on the health and economic security of nearly three million women who are enrolled in health insurance through these Exchanges now and millions more in the future.
House Republican’s fiscal year 2016 budget resolution includes devastating cuts to the health care programs women and families rely on. The proposal would repeal the Affordable Care Act, make drastic cuts to Medicaid, and convert Medicare into a capped subsidy for health insurance premiums. These changes would leave millions of women and their families without the financial security of high-quality health insurance, unable to access the health care services they need, and facing dramatic increases in their healthcare costs.