DOCSLIB.ORG

Rape Policy Dispute Spirals to Protest

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rape Policy Dispute Spirals to Protest Inside: NCAA Basketball Tournament Pull-out WEATHER INSIDE TODAY: party cloudy variable cloudiness and wind NEWS ....3 M0E4O Low:30 OPINION .18 STYLE 22 FMDAY: partly doudy FOCUS .29 M0C4O Low:30 SPORTS .35 HUMOR 45 CLASSIFIEDS. .47 THURSDAY MARCH 17,1994 VOL 71, NO. 40 Rape policy dispute spirals to protest Protest leads JMU clarifies to overnight misconduct student sit-in judicial policy by Heather ()'Neil by Drew vanEssektyn senior writer news editor Members of the Student JMU may adopt a more clearly Coalition Against Rape took defined sexual misconduct policy matters — and a university next year, although some people building — into their own hands are concerned that the word this week as they continued to "misconduct" does not campaign for a change in JMU's effectively address the act of handling of sexual assault. sexual assault or rape, which is a In protest of what one student term now included in the policy. called the university's Mike Way, assistant to the "stonewalling" of the group and associate vice president for their policy proposal, members of student affairs, recommended in SCAR and about 80 of their his presentation to the Judicial supporters staged a sit-in at Control Board on Tuesday Alumnae Hall from about 5 p.m. afternoon that the use of the word Tuesday until 9 a.m. Wednesday. "misconduct" remain in JMU's Students rallied after a Judicial policy. Control Board meeting ended In a policy modeled after a with what they saw as similar program formulated by unsatisfactory results Tuesday the State Council of Higher afternoon. SCAR supporters said Education for Virginia, sexual they wanted the administration to MIKE HEFFNER misconduct is defined as "sexual understand "we won't go away." contact without consent" and is SGA senator Laura Jenkins SCAR members and supporters demanded swift action from the administration Wednesday morning during a press conference that followed an all-night sit-in at Alumnae Hall. broken down into several areas of said the administration has distinction. offered "no real answers" to the administration hasn't been totally Associate Vice President for deliberative. He said that time Acts listed under the sexual group, which is seeking major insensitive to their cause, it's Student Affairs Al Menard said allows the administration to reach misconduct policy are: revision of the university's time they realized many want to although the group has made its viable decisions it will support intentional touching of the victim current sexual misconduct policy. see this policy changed. "They position clear, the university and maintain for years afterward. or forcing the victim to touch "Sexual assault is an emergency," need to pay attention to students decision-making process is The field of sexual assault directly or through clothing, rape, she said, adding that while the when students propose reform." intentionally slow and PROTEST page 2 MISCONDUCT page 2 Dukes head to tournament with dreams-a-plenty and lots o' luck by Steve Miranda The game is set for 10:05 tonight and sports editor will be aired live locally on the CBS affiliate from Richmond, WTVR-6, and JMU men's basketball coach Lefty the Washington D.C. affiliate WUSA-9. Driesell has finally attained the seemingly The No. 3 seed Gators are most noted unattainable — an NCAA Tournament for their tenacious defense, which held berth. Now his task is to make sure the opponents to just 41.6 percent shooting Dukes aren't just happy to be there. from the field and 31.7 percent from "I hope they wouldn't do that," three-point range. Driesell said. "I'm hoping to go in here "They're a lot like Duke. They and go the Final Four or win a overplay and deny all your passes," championship or something. It's a dream, Driesell said. "That's their forte, their but it could happen. defense." "We've got a l-in-64 chance of The game will be a reunion for junior winning the national championship." forward Louis Rowe, who played his The 14th-ranked University of Florida, freshman and sophomore seasons at which boasts a 25-7 record and advanced MIKE HEFFNER Florida, and was teammates with most of the finals of the Southeastern Conference its current roster. He and senior guard Kent Culuko's winning shot in the CAA championship has the Dukes racing for tournament last week, stands in JMU's that pot of gold tonight in the NCAA Tournament game against Univ. Qf Florida. way. DUKES page 39 2 THE BREEZE Thursday, March 17,1994 Protest continued from page 1 emerged from Alumnae Hall, to re-evaluate its decision to recommendations to JMU say that we were dragging out home to the office of student maintain the phrase "sexual President Ronald Carrier next feet" education is relatively new, affairs, with about 80 other misconduct" as the judicial week that address the change in SCAR supporters have pointed Menard said, and that keeps the people to make a statement for charge for rape rather than the definition of the sexual to Way as the lone decision- university from rushing to any the group Wednesday morning. "sexual assault" and that the misconduct for the student maker in the current judicial decisions regarding the policy or "We submitted our proposal in university immediately establish handbook as well as some issues process, but Way disagrees. seeking the most expedient good faith hoping that we could a third-party, anonymous related to the SCAR proposal. "Currently, either student, the option, including satisfying the work with the Office of Student reporting system for rape victims. Scott expects Carrier to review accused student or the accusing "demands" set forth by the group. Affairs to address the issue of Senior Katie Whitaker spoke his recommendations next week. student has the right to reject my "The way to bring about rape at JMU," Ryman said. "We out to try explain the judicial At noon on Wednesday, the decision." change ... is not through believe, as nearly 700 students system from the perspective of a protesters held a speakout on the If a student chooses to appeal coercion" or heavy media who have supported our proposal rape survivor. "The system at commons, outlining the proposed Way's decision, he said, a attention, Menard said. The group believe, that the present does not work," Whitaker policy revisions and arguing that judicial council of three students had sent word of the recommendations of SCAR are said. "It did not work for me, and the administration has not acted and three faculty members will demonstration to media outlets reasonable and will assist not it will not work for you or your quickly or effectively enough to hear the case without knowing locally and in Richmond and only the victims of rape on friend or your child or your address their concerns. Way' s first judgment. Washington, D.C. campus but also the entire sibling, who may be the next University Judicial At the sit-in, SCAR member He said the current system university community." unfortunate student who is Coordinator Mike Way said he Brian Kildee said the group was provides "not adequate but The demands outlined by victimized by sexual assault." doesn't think the administration "realistic" and willing to work excellent support services" for Ryman call for the university to In a press release statement, has moved too slowly. "We're with the university for written sexual assault victims, but the hire a full-time sexual assault Vice President for Student not dragging our feet with any changes beginning this semester. university would be willing to education coordinator, require Affairs Robert Scott said the decision," he said. "If any student Scott said the Monday "engage in dialogue" with another Judicial Control Board administration appreciates the group presented a set of demands deadline the group set won't concerned groups, rather than meeting so that procedural concern shown by SCAR and that and demanded unilateral affect the policy review process. continue to "talk at each other." changes can be considered by their suggestions have been acceptance and it didn't happen "We're working on our own SCAR member Candy Ryman March 21, ask the administration heard. He will forward that way, of course they would schedule here." Misconduct continued from page 1 only minutes before it began, but Way higher standard of behavior." said members of SCAR had been notified Conner, also a member of the university Also at the Judicial Control attempted rape, sodomy or sexual sometime before the meeting of its time judicial council, said the proposed policy Board Meeting: penetration with an object without and location. "gives our university more to work with. I • Way presented an analysis of the consent. Way said the state council had given don't like narrowing our options." current JMU judicial system and a The policy states, 'To constitute lack of JMU parameters for the policy's word The state's defense of the word brief overview of the setup for the consent, the acts must be committed either choice and that SCHEV said it would "misconduct" centered on the notion that Judicial Council. The composition of by force, intimidation or through use of legally support JMU on the condition that having a noticeable distinction for on the council is 16 students and 16 the victim's mental incapacity or physical the word "misconduct" was used rather campus crime versus criminal codes faculty members. helplessness." than "assault." would also allow for colleges and Way reported that alcohol-related Way introduced the policy and universities to not be bound by criminal violations are "on the rise" doe in part submitted it for approval by the board with punishments and in fact may be more to the fact that students are coming to the understanding it would take effect in Misconduct doesn 't "stringent than the code off campus." JMU with more of an exposure to the 1994-95 JMU Student Handbook.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Plaintiffs' Brief in Response to All Defendants Motions to Dismiss
    Electronically Filed 2021-02-17 16:41:44 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION COUNTY OF WAKE CASE NO. 20 CVS 500147 PLANNED PARENTHOOD SOUTH ATLANTIC, on behalf of itself, its physicians and staff, and its patients; et al., Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFFS’ BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO v. ALL DEFENDANTS’ TIMOTHY K. MOORE, as Speaker of the North MOTIONS TO DISMISS Carolina House of Representatives, in his official capacity; et al., Defendants. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ......................................................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 2 STANDARD OF REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 3 ARGUMENT .................................................................................................................................. 4 I. This Court Has Subject Matter Jurisdiction ........................................................................ 4 A. Plaintiffs Have Standing ......................................................................................... 4 1. Plaintiff Providers Have Standing in Their Own Right .............................. 5 a. Plaintiff Providers Have Suffered a Direct Injury Sufficient
    [Show full text]
  • Mandated Offer of Insurance Plans Not Covering Induced Abortions Outside of Certain Exceptions
    REPORT TO THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE AUDIT GOVERNOR AND THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF VIrgINIA AND REVIEW COMMISSION Evaluation of Proposed Mandated Health Insurance Benefits Evaluation of House Bill 1174: Mandated Offer of Insurance Plans Not Covering Induced Abortions Outside of Certain Exceptions COMMONWEALTH OF VIrgINIA RICHMOND MARCH 2013 Members of the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission Chairman Delegate John M. O’Bannon III Vice-Chairman Senator John C. Watkins Delegate David B. Albo Senator Charles J. Colgan Delegate M. Kirkland Cox Senator Janet D. Howell Delegate Johnny S. Joannou Delegate S. Chris Jones Delegate James P. Massie III Senator Thomas K. Norment, Jr. Delegate Robert D. Orrock, Sr. Delegate Lacey E. Putney Delegate Lionell Spruill, Sr. Senator Walter A. Stosch Martha S. Mavredes, Auditor of Public Accounts Director Glen S. Tittermary Members of the Special Advisory Commission on Mandated Health Insurance Benefits Senator George L. Barker Delegate Timothy D. Hugo Delegate Terry G. Kilgore Senator Donald W. Merricks Senator A. Donald McEachin Delegate Christopher K. Peace Jeffrey Allende Terri B. Flagg Mark W. Foreman Eugene J. Koprowski Greg T. Madsen John W. Rhee, M.D. Charles Herbert Slemp III Laura Lee O. Viergever JLARC Staff for This Evaluation Nathalie Molliet-Ribet, Division Chief Kimberly A. Sarte, Chief Fiscal Analyst Massey S.J. Whorley, Senior Associate Legislative Analyst JLARC provides evaluations of proposed health insurance mandates in accordance with Sections 2.2-2503 and 30-58.1 of the Code of Virginia. Report No. 440 - Available on the JLARC website at http://jlarc.virginia.gov Copyright 2013, Commonwealth of Virginia. Evaluation of Proposed Mandated Health Insurance Benefits Evaluation of House Bill 1174: Mandated Offer of Insurance Plans Not Covering Induced Abortions Outside of Certain Exceptions JLARC SUMMARY House Bill (HB) 1174 of the 2012 General Assembly Session would mandate health insurers to offer policies that do not provide cover- age for abortion services outside of certain required exceptions.
    [Show full text]
  • MIT and Amgen Dink 10-Year Pact
    MIT's The Weather Oldest and Largest Today: Increasing clouds, 54°F (12°C) Tonight: Mostly cloudy, 36°F (2°C) Newspaper Tomorrow: Sprinkles, 45°F (7°C) Details, Page 2 Volume 114, Number 17 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 Friday, April I, 1994 I DInkrOLL L 10-YearCUWL Zj&&l.v/I" Pact MIT 'V "tf I f\ and'W AmgenT^ J~~~~~~mof I SnB^B JBVudy* Ecit i i Ev"tl lawslc t ligA~~~ Z i i i By Sarah Y. Keightley definite plus," Hynes said. "We'll EXECUTI VE EDI'TOR i see more arrangements likes this. ... On Tuesday, the Institute and Relationships with companies are Amgen, a biotechnology company, very healthy," he said. Because gov- t announced their agreement for a ernment funding is rising too slow- decade-long partnership. ly, industry funding helps cover the Amgen will fund research efforts increased expenses and enables at MIT - giving up to $3 million a more research projects to be carried year for 10 years -- in exchange for out, he said. some patent and technology licens- "This university-industry collab- ing rights on this research, accord- oration will advance the already ing to a press release. The company rapid pace of scientific discoveries will use the research results to in biology and other sciences," Vest develop and manufacture pharma- said. ceutical products. Scientists can make discoveries, Both sides are pleased with the but "we can't develop them to a collaborative arrangement. point" where the public can use ,.^sZ.. ,y . , W/..., , -- ........ ;"*.. :.;w. | "This agreement with Amgen them, Hynes said. This is where the · A represents an essential element in pharmaceutical companies can take HELEN LIN--HE TECHL the kind of future I see for MIT -- a the idea and develop it, he said.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia's Targeted Regulations of Abortion Providers
    Washington and Lee Law Review Volume 71 | Issue 2 Article 18 Spring 3-1-2014 Virginia's Targeted Regulations of Abortion Providers: The Attempt to Regulation Abortion out of Existence Katharine Greenier American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia Rebecca Glenberg American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Legislation Commons, and the Women Commons Recommended Citation Katharine Greenier and Rebecca Glenberg, Virginia's Targeted Regulations of Abortion Providers: The Attempt to Regulation Abortion out of Existence, 71 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 1233 (2014), http://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol71/iss2/18 This Session 3 is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Virginia’s Targeted Regulations of Abortion Providers: The Attempt to Regulate Abortion out of Existence Katharine Greenier∗ Rebecca Glenberg∗∗ Table of Contents I. Introduction ................................................................... 1234 II. The Emergence of TRAP in Virginia ............................. 1238 A. At the General Assembly ........................................ 1238 B. Administrative Process ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Facility Regulation on Abortion Access in Virginia
    POLICY AND POLITICS: THE EFFECTS OF FACILITY REGULATION ON ABORTION ACCESS IN VIRGINIA A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of Architecture and Planning COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Urban Planning by Sara Elisa Miller May 2013 Policy and Politics: The effects of facility regulation on abortion access in Virginia By Sara Elisa Miller Candidate for Master of Science, Urban Planning Columbia University 2013 Abstract Pro‐choice organizations claim that by 2014, over half of the twenty health centers providing abortions in Virginia will be forced to discontinue services as a result of a regulation categorizing these facilities as hospitals. Proponents of the regulation claim its purpose is to increase patient safety; however, higher‐risk medical procedures, such as cosmetic and dental surgeries, are not subject to similar regulatory scrutiny. This investigation seeks to understand general conditions under which the categorization of abortion providers as hospitals impacts operational costs, as well as bars entry of new providers into the market. Using Virginia as a case study, it also specifically explores how local politics impacts the implementation of health planning, policies, and regulations. Acknowledgements I am forever indebted to Professor Smita Srinivas for her guidance, support, and challenge to push further than I ever thought possible. In addition, Dr. Beverly Winikoff was incredibly helpful and insightful in the final stages of the process. I appreciate both of their commitments to this scholarship and to my growth as a researcher. David Nova of Planned Parenthood Health Systems in Virginia provided many hours of consultation, exploration, and feedback, without which this research would not have been possible.
    [Show full text]
  • What Factors Lead to Abortion Restrictions? a Case Study of Virginia and Texas Legislation
    What Factors Lead to Abortion Restrictions? A Case Study of Virginia and Texas Legislation Angela Smith Professor Elizabeth Sherman General University Honors May 2013 Abstract Abortion legislation is something that has historically been left to the states. While the landmark case Roe v. Wade ensured every woman’s right to have an abortion if they so choose, many states and proposed and implemented legislation that makes it significantly more difficult to obtain an abortion. In Texas a strict ultrasound requirement was passed, ensuring that women had to undergo an ultrasound by the doctor performing the abortion 24 hours prior to the procedure. These women had to look at the image on the screen or hear the fetal heartbeat while the doctor describes the image and the development of the fetus; if the woman is less than 12 weeks along they may have to undergo a trans-vaginal sonogram in order to get a clear image. With little public notice the law passed and was enacted in 2012. Later in 2012 the Virginia State Legislature attempted to pass similar legislation, but the law was blocked on several levels and received a huge public backlash. After the media firestorm the legislation was amended in an effort to pass. What makes it possible for some of this legislation to be enacted in some states with little controversy while other states can introduce similar legislation to fierce negativity? This paper uses the ultrasound requirements in Virginia and Texas as a case study to better understand what factors contribute to abortions restrictions. Looking at how these policies were able to be passed helps us better understand how women’s rights to abortion can be restricted.
    [Show full text]
  • Calendar No. 472
    Calendar No. 472 105TH CONGRESS REPORT 2d Session SENATE 105±268 "! THE CHILD CUSTODY PROTECTION ACT JULY 27, 1998.ÐOrdered to be printed Mr. HATCH, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following REPORT together with MINORITY VIEWS [To accompany S. 1645] The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the bill (S. 1645) to amend provisions of title 18, United States Code, to prohibit taking minors across State lines to avoid laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon, with an amendment in the na- ture of a substitute, and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass. CONTENTS Page I. Purpose ........................................................................................................... 3 II. Legislative history ......................................................................................... 3 III. Discussion ....................................................................................................... 4 IV. Vote of the Committee ................................................................................... 23 V. Section-by-section analysis ............................................................................ 24 VI. Cost estimate .................................................................................................. 26 VII. Regulatory impact statement ........................................................................ 27 VIII. Minority views of Senators Leahy, Kennedy, Feinstein, Feingold,
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Facility Regulation on Abortion Access in Virginia
    View metadata, citation and similarbrought papersCORE to atyou core.ac.uk by provided by Columbia University Academic Commons POLICY AND POLITICS: THE EFFECTS OF FACILITY REGULATION ON ABORTION ACCESS IN VIRGINIA A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of Architecture and Planning COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Urban Planning by Sara Elisa Miller May 2013 Policy and Politics: The effects of facility regulation on abortion access in Virginia By Sara Elisa Miller Candidate for Master of Science, Urban Planning Columbia University 2013 Abstract Pro‐choice organizations claim that by 2014, over half of the twenty health centers providing abortions in Virginia will be forced to discontinue services as a result of a regulation categorizing these facilities as hospitals. Proponents of the regulation claim its purpose is to increase patient safety; however, higher‐risk medical procedures, such as cosmetic and dental surgeries, are not subject to similar regulatory scrutiny. This investigation seeks to understand general conditions under which the categorization of abortion providers as hospitals impacts operational costs, as well as bars entry of new providers into the market. Using Virginia as a case study, it also specifically explores how local politics impacts the implementation of health planning, policies, and regulations. Acknowledgements I am forever indebted to Professor Smita Srinivas for her guidance, support, and challenge to push further than I ever thought possible. In addition, Dr. Beverly Winikoff was incredibly helpful and insightful in the final stages of the process. I appreciate both of their commitments to this scholarship and to my growth as a researcher.
    [Show full text]
  • New Evidence on the Effects of Mandatory Waiting Periods for Abortion Jason M
    New Evidence on the Effects of Mandatory Waiting Periods for Abortion Jason M. Lindo and Mayra Pineda-Torres NBER Working Paper No. 26228 September 2019, Revised in September 2020 JEL No. I11,I12,I18,J13,K23 ABSTRACT Beyond a handful of studies examining early-adopting states in the early 1990s, little is known about the causal effects of mandatory waiting periods for abortion. In this study we evaluate the effects of a Tennessee law enacted in 2015 that requires women to make an additional trip to abortion providers for state-directed counseling at least 48 hours before they can obtain an abortion. Our difference-in-differences and synthetic-control estimates indicate that the introduction of the mandatory waiting period caused a 48–73 percent increase in the share of abortions obtained during the second trimester. Our analysis examining overall abortion rates is less conclusive but suggests a reduction caused by the waiting period. Putting these estimates into context, our back-of-the-envelope calculations indicate that Tennessee’s MWP increased the monetary costs of obtaining an abortion by as much as $929 for some women. Jason M. Lindo Department of Economics Texas A&M University 4228 TAMU College Station, TX 77843 and NBER [email protected] Mayra Pineda-Torres Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77845 [email protected] New Evidence on the Effects of Mandatory Waiting Periods for Abortion Jason M. Lindo r Mayra Pineda-Torres (Certified Random Ordering For Equally Contributing Authors) September 2020 Abstract Beyond a handful of studies examining early-adopting states in the early 1990s, little is known about the causal effects of mandatory waiting periods for abortion.
    [Show full text]
  • ©2021 Caitlin Rose Brown ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
    ©2021 Caitlin Rose Brown ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CHOOSING BETWEEN REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH AND HEALTH FROM CORONAVIRUS: THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND BARRIERS TO ABORTION ACCESS By CAITLIN ROSE BROWN A thesis submitted to the School of Graduate Studies Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Master of Arts Graduate Program of Women’s and Gender Studies Written under the direction of Cynthia Daniels And approved by ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ New Brunswick, New Jersey May 2021 1 ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS CHOOSING BETWEEN REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH AND HEALTH FROM CORONAVIRUS: THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND BARRIERS TO ABORTION TO ABORTION ACCESS By CAITLIN ROSE BROWN Thesis Director: Cynthia Daniels The COVID-19 pandemic in the United States brought to the forefront a new iteration of barriers to abortion access that continue a long history of regulations and restrictions on abortion procedures despite its constitutional protections. During the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, individual states following federal recommendations halted healthcare procedures deemed elective/non-essential in an effort to preserve supplies, staff, and space for essential services in an attempt to handle the increasing burden on the healthcare system. In some states, the designation of elective included abortion procedures which quickly brought about several lawsuits from the ACLU and abortion providers. This paper employs a reproductive justice framework to consider the impact of such policies including rhetorical ramifications of designating abortion procedures as elective healthcare and the risk and impact of suspending procedures on marginalized communities through the case study of Texas ii and Planned Parenthood v.
    [Show full text]
  • IN the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the EASTERN DISTRICT of VIRGINIA Richmond Division
    Case 3:18-cv-00428-HEH Document 195 Filed 09/30/19 Page 1 of 67 PageID# 10844 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division FALLS CHURCH MEDICAL CENTER, ) LLC d/b/a FALLS CHURCH ) HEAL THCARE CENTER, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) V. ) Civil Action No. 3: 18cv428-HEH ) M. NORMAN OLIVER, VIRGINIA ) HEALTH COMMISSIONER, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION (Post-Trial Judgment) I. INTRODUCTION For more than five decades, the Supreme Court has recognized that within the right to privacy exists a woman's right to make decisions regarding the circumstances surrounding when and with whom she will bear a child-or whether she chooses to bear a child at all. See, e.g., Planned Parenthood ofS.E. Pa. v. Casey, SOS U.S. 833 (1992); Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973); Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972); Griswoldv. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965). In the landmark decision of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court established that women have a "fundamental right grounded in the Fourteenth Amendment to end a pregnancy by aborting the life of the fetus." Greenville Women's Clinic v. Bryant, 222 F.3d 157, 165 (4th Cir. 2000) (citing Roe, 410 U.S. at 153-56). That right "involv[es] the most intimate and personal choices a person may Case 3:18-cv-00428-HEH Document 195 Filed 09/30/19 Page 2 of 67 PageID# 10845 make in a lifetime,'' choices that are central to the individual autonomy and liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
    [Show full text]
  • U:\Reproductive Health Care
    EXAMINING STATE EFFORTS TO UNDERMINE ACCESS TO REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION NOVEMBER 14, 2019 Serial No. 116–71 Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Reform ( Available on: http://www.govinfo.gov http://www.oversight.house.gov http://www.docs.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 38–554 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019 COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York, Acting Chairwoman ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Ranking Minority Member Columbia PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky JIM COOPER, Tennessee MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia JODY B. HICE, Georgia RAJA KRISHNAMOORTHI, Illinois GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland JAMES COMER, Kentucky HARLEY ROUDA, California MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas KATIE HILL, California BOB GIBBS, Ohio DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana PETER WELCH, Vermont CHIP ROY, Texas JACKIE SPEIER, California CAROL D. MILLER, West Virginia ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois MARK E. GREEN, Tennessee MARK DESAULNIER, California KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands FRANK KELLER, Pennsylvania RO KHANNA, California JIMMY GOMEZ, California ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, New York AYANNA PRESSLEY, Massachusetts RASHIDA TLAIB, Michigan DAVID RAPALLO, Staff Director MILES LICHTMAN, Professional Staff Member JENNIFER GASPER, Counsel JOSHUA ZUCKER, Clerk CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Minority Staff Director CONTACT NUMBER: 202-225-5051 (II) CONTENTS Page Hearing held on November 14, 2019 .....................................................................
    [Show full text]