Emily Martin, Vice President and General Counsel

Emily Martin

Emily Martin is Vice President and General Counsel at the National Women's Law Center, where she undertakes cross-cutting projects addressing women's health, economic security, and education and employment opportunities. She also provides in-house legal advice and representation to the Center. Prior to joining the Center, Ms. Martin served as Deputy Director of the Women's Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, where she spearheaded litigation, policy, and public education initiatives to advance the rights of women and girls, with a particular emphasis on the needs of low-income women and women of color. She also served as a law clerk for Senior Judge Wilfred Feinberg of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and Judge T.S. Ellis, III, of the Eastern District of Virginia and previously worked for the Center as a recipient of the Georgetown Women's Law and Public Policy Fellowship. She has served as Vice President and President of the Fair Housing Justice Center, a non-profit organization in New York City. She is a graduate of the University of Virginia and Yale Law School.

Expert in: Issues Before the Courts, Platform for Progress, Treaty on the Rights of Women, Supreme Court, Voter Education, Women & the Constitution, Unemployment, Employment
  • Printer-friendly version
  • Send by email

My Take

Reed v. Reed Reminds Us What’s At Stake for Women in Constitutional Fights

Posted by Emily Martin, Vice President and General Counsel | Posted on: November 22, 2011 at 02:36 pm

Happy anniversary! Forty years ago today, the Supreme Court ruled for the first time in history that a law that discriminated against women violated the Constitution. Reed v. Reed was the first in a series of path-breaking cases that established that the Constitution does not permit government to discriminate on the basis of sex unless it can prove it has an exceedingly persuasive justification for doing so. Today let’s start giving thanks a few days early and celebrate the cases that recognized that women are among those persons who may not be denied equal protection of the law under the Fourteenth Amendment.

But while these victories merit celebration, today it is also important to remember that women still have much at stake in current arguments about the Constitution and its meaning. For example, a week ago, the Supreme Court agreed to consider whether the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid and individual responsibility provision are constitutional. The answers to these questions will determine the fate of the Affordable Care Act-- legislation of tremendous importance to women’s health. The Court’s decision may also affect other laws upon which women depend.

Read more...
Tags: Balanced Budget Amendment, Equal Protection Clause, Reed v. Reed, Sex Discrimination, Supreme Court, Women & the Constitution | Add new comment

Reed v. Reed at 40: A Landmark Decision

Posted by Emily Martin, Vice President and General Counsel | Posted on: November 16, 2011 at 12:27 pm

In 1971, the United States Supreme Court invalidated an Idaho law that required the selection of a man over a woman to serve as administrator of an estate when both were equally qualified.  The landmark Reed v. Reed decision, 404 U.S. 71 (1971), marked the first time in history that the Court applied the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to strike down a law that discriminated against women.

Background of the Reed v. Reed Case

The woman who challenged Idaho’s discriminatory statute was Sally Reed, a single mother who earned a living by caring for disabled people in her home.  The case began when her teenage son Skip died tragically. According to Sally, her ex-husband, Cecil Reed, was an abusive husband and father who deserted the family when their son was only three or four years old. After their divorce, Sally raised Skip during his “tender years,” but Cecil was awarded partial custody of Skip when he reached his teens.  During one of his visits, Skip was found dead in his father’s basement, having apparently shot himself with his father’s rifle. Skip’s death was determined a suicide, but Sally was suspicious because Cecil had taken out a life insurance policy on the boy.  Because Skip had died without a will, Sally filed a petition to be appointed administrator of his estate, which consisted of only $495 and a few personal belongings. Cecil Reed put in a rival application.

Read more...
Tags: Equal Protection Clause, Fourteenth Amendment, Reed v. Reed, Supreme Court, Supreme Court, Judges & the Courts | Add new comment

An Unlikely Source Affirms the Constitutionality of Health Care Reform

Posted by Emily Martin, Vice President and General Counsel | Posted on: November 09, 2011 at 01:56 pm

Yesterday, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals became the third of the four federal appeals courts to consider the issue to turn back a constitutional challenge to the individual responsibility provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Congress has the power to require individuals to obtain health insurance (with subsidies for low- and moderate-income individuals), the court held, as part of its authority under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution to regulate commercial markets, including the insurance industry. Those challenging the individual responsibility provision have argued that Congress nevertheless cannot require individuals to participate in the insurance market if they choose not to. But, as we argued in a brief in the case and the D.C. Circuit held, civil rights cases show that such a requirement falls squarely within Congress’s Commerce Clause power. As the D.C. Circuit Court stated, while the individual responsibility’s requirement that people obtain health insurance “is an encroachment on individual liberty, . . .it is no more so than a command that restaurants or hotels are obliged to serve all customers regardless of race.”

But just as notable as the decision itself is who wrote it. Senior Judge Laurence Silberman, the author of the opinion, is an intellectual leader among conservatives. 

Read more...
Tags: Affordable Care Act (ACA), Courts, Issues Before the Courts, Judges, Health Care Reform | Add new comment

Senator Boxer Urges Ratification of Women’s Rights Treaty

Posted by Emily Martin, Vice President and General Counsel | Posted on: November 04, 2011 at 09:44 am

At a Senate hearing on women and the Arab Spring on Wednesday, witnesses emphasized the importance of U.S. ratification of the Convention for Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) for women’s government reform efforts in the Middle East and North Africa, leading Senator Boxer of California to strongly endorse U.S. ratification of the treaty. The United States is currently one of only six nations in the world that has not ratified CEDAW.

The witnesses at the hearing described this as a moment with tremendous and unique potential, but also tremendous risk, for women in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and other countries in the region where activists are seeking fundamental reforms ensuring women’s participation in new governments and the protection of women’s interests. They explained how women’s full participation in government and society was necessary to achieve stability and prosperity in the region. And they also made clear that U.S. ratification of CEDAW would provide real assistance to these women’s efforts.

Read more...
Tags: CEDAW, Treaty on the Rights of Women | Add new comment

House Bill Would Strip U.S. Funding for Women's Global Rights

Posted by Emily Martin, Vice President and General Counsel | Posted on: October 13, 2011 at 02:39 pm

Today, a House Committee will consider a bill that seeks to eliminate U.S. funding to the U.N. committee tasked with improving the status of women around the world — an unprecedented move. The Convention for Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), a landmark international agreement ratified by every country in the world except the U.S., Iran, Somalia, Sudan, and two small Pacific islands, affirms principles of fundamental human rights and equality for women around the world. The CEDAW Committee assists countries in implementing these principles, by recommending nonbinding best practices to ratifying countries. Countries have often undertaken important reforms based on the CEDAW Committee urging that they live up to their CEDAW commitments. For example, women in Kuwait won the right to vote for the first time in 2005 immediately after the CEDAW Committee brought international attention to Kuwaiti women's disenfranchisement. In 2007, Nepal responded to recommendations from the CEDAW Committee to take steps to address trafficking of women and girls by enacting strong new laws, in line with CEDAW's provisions. That same year, Sierra Leone passed a Domestic Violence Act committing to protect women from violence, within a month of the CEDAW Committee's recommendation to place the highest priority on enactment of such a law.

Read more...
Tags: Treaty on the Rights of Women | Add new comment