Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

'The question is, will the Court sanction the use of religion to discriminate?' wonders an American Civil Liberties Union legal expert. (Photo: Planned Parenthood/Twitter)

'Hands Off My Birth Control': Activists Demand US Supreme Court Protect Women's Health

'Denying any woman the healthcare she needs and is guaranteed by law is discrimination, plain and simple'

Nika Knight

The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments on Wednesday in Zubik v. Burwell, a reproductive rights case with high stakes and implications "far beyond the realm of reproductive healthcare," as ProPublica observed.

In a case reminiscent of Hobby Lobby's successful suit that permitted the for-profit corporation to refuse its employees healthcare coverage for birth control, in Zubik v. Burwell religious organizations argue that allowing their female employees to access birth control—even birth control provided by a third party—violates their religious rights.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) permits religious groups to opt-out of the healthcare law's requirement that employer-provided health insurance cover birth control. All that religious organizations need to do to opt-out is to fill out a simple form.

And yet in Zubik v. Burwell the religious groups "claim that the requirement to complete a one-page form stating their objection to birth control coverage is an impermissible burden on their religious beliefs," noted the Center for Reproductive Rights in a statement.

"Access to affordable contraception is essential to women’s equality and economic security. Denying any woman the health care she needs and is guaranteed by law is discrimination, plain and simple," said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. "The burdens a woman faces when she is denied access to affordable contraception and reproductive health care vastly outweigh the negligible task of filling out a one-page form."

In an amicus brief (pdf) filed on behalf of the federal government by the Center for Reproductive Rights, international law experts argue that a decision in favor of the religious non-profits will make the United States an "international outlier."

"International authorities have long noted the critical importance of access to contraception," the brief observes.

Indeed, the argument presented in Zubik v. Burwell has "grave implications for the constitution and for American women," said American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) deputy legal director Louise Melling in a press statement. "The question is, will the Court sanction the use of religion to discriminate?"

"A ruling in favor of the religious nonprofits would not only undermine key provisions of the ACA; it could also lead to challenges to laws meant to protect gays and lesbians from discrimination," warned Gretchen Borchelt, vice president for reproductive rights and health at the National Women's Law Center, in an interview with ProPublica.

The religious non-profits' argument in Zubik v. Burwell marks "an unprecedented challenge to the very process by which a religious objector gets out of complying with the law," Borchelt noted to ProPublica. "This is something we have not seen before."

Reproductive rights activists are rallying outside of the Supreme Court and tweeting their opposition to this latest threat to women's healthcare under the hashtag #HandsOffMyBC.

"I still can't believe both birth control and abortion are before the Supreme Court this term," lamented MSNBC reporter Irin Carmon in a tweet. Activists have noted that this latest threat to women's health comes only three weeks after the Supreme Court heard a case with the potential to"dramatically alter" abortion access nationwide.

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

This is the world we live in. This is the world we cover.

Because of people like you, another world is possible. There are many battles to be won, but we will battle them together—all of us. Common Dreams is not your normal news site. We don't survive on clicks. We don't want advertising dollars. We want the world to be a better place. But we can't do it alone. It doesn't work that way. We need you. If you can help today—because every gift of every size matters—please do. Without Your Support We Simply Don't Exist.

Sanders Says There's 'No Excuse' for Any Democrat to Oppose Lowering Drug Prices

"Now is the time for Congress to show courage and stand up to the greed of the pharmaceutical industry."

Jake Johnson ·

Covid-19 Vaccine Makers Blasted for 'Unconscionable Profits,' Monopolies, and Low Taxes

"Big Pharma's business model—receive billions in public investments, charge exorbitant prices for lifesaving medicines, pay little tax—is gold dust for wealthy investors and corporate executives but devastating for global public health."

Common Dreams staff ·

UN Human Rights Chief Calls for Global Halt to Sales of Dangerous AI Technologies

"The power of AI to serve people is undeniable, but so is AI's ability to feed human rights violations at an enormous scale with virtually no visibility."

Brett Wilkins ·

ICC Approves Probe Into 'Drug War' Atrocities Carried Out by Duterte Regime

"Duterte along with his co-accused henchmen of the war on drugs will be facing justice."

Andrea Germanos ·

Global Indigenous Coalition Echoes Call to Postpone UN Climate Talks

"No equitable or just climate solutions can emerge from such an unjust process."

Brett Wilkins ·

Support our work.

We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100% reader supported.

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values.
Direct to your inbox.

Subscribe to our Newsletter.

Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit | Privacy Policy
Common Dreams Logo