March, 11 2022, 01:09pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Center for Reproductive Rights: center.press@reprorights.org
Planned Parenthood Federation of America: media.office@ppfa.org
ACLU: media@aclu.org
ACLU of Texas: media@aclutx.org
The Lawyering Project: media@lawyeringproject.org
Whole Woman’s Health: press@wholewomanshealth.com
Texas Supreme Court Decision Means Abortion Ban Challenge Will Be Thrown Out
Scores of Texans have been denied abortion care in the state since the U.S. Supreme Court let the law take effect on September 1.
WASHINGTON
Today, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson - once the most promising lawsuit against Texas' ban on abortion after six weeks of pregnancy (S.B. 8) - cannot proceed against the Texas Medical Board and other similar state licensing officials, the only remaining defendants in that challenge. This ruling comes after the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed most of the case in December 2021, allowing only a small part of the case to move forward in lower court. Today's ruling will result in dismissal of the remaining portion of the challenge to the 6-week ban, meaning S.B. 8 will likely remain in effect for the foreseeable future.
The case was filed in July 2021 by abortion providers, funds and other advocates in Texas seeking to block S.B. 8. Since then, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to block the ban numerous times and finally dismissed most of the case three months ago, ruling that federal courts are powerless to block this kind of citizen-enforced law despite its blatant attack on established constitutional rights. The only part of the case that was allowed to move forward was against the Texas Medical Board and other state licensing officials, seeking to prevent them from taking disciplinary actions against doctors and other health professionals who provided abortion care in violation of S.B. 8. Today, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that these officials do not have the authority to revoke licenses for violations of S.B. 8, leaving no other defendants against which the case can proceed. The ban remains in place, including the bounty-hunting scheme, which puts a $10,000 bounty on the head of anyone who provides an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy or helps someone obtain an abortion past that point.
Clinics in neighboring states have reported huge upticks in Texas patients since S.B. 8 took effect, resulting in weeks-long wait times. At Hope Medical Group--an abortion clinic in Louisiana--64% of their current patients are Texas residents. Planned Parenthood released data in February showing that, in the first four months after S.B. 8 took effect, more than half of the patients at their Oklahoma health centers were from Texas, compared to less than 10% in the prior year. Many other Texans have been unable to travel out of state and have been forced to carry their pregnancies to term or attempt to manage an abortion on their own. The impact has fallen hardest on marginalized communities, including people living on low incomes, and Black and brown communities.
Already this year, ten states have introduced bills copying S.B. 8. In Oklahoma, the legislature is expected to pass a copycat bill by the end of the month, which has an immediate effective date. That means by the end of March, abortion may be banned after 6 weeks in Oklahoma--a state where many Texans have been traveling to find abortion services. Other states that have introduced copycat bills include: Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin.
The plaintiffs in Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson include Whole Woman's Health; Whole Woman's Health Alliance; eleven Planned Parenthood health centers throughout the state; Southwestern Women's Surgical Center; Austin Women's Health Center; Alamo Women's Reproductive Services; Houston Women's Reproductive Services; Dr. Allison Gilbert and Dr. Bhavik Kumar, who provide abortion services; Reverend Erika Forbes and Reverend Daniel Kanter, who provide emotional and spiritual counseling and support to patients considering abortion; the Afiya Center; Frontera Fund; Fund Texas Choice (FTC); Jane's Due Process; Lilith Fund; the TEA Fund; and Marva Sadler, Senior Director of Clinical Services at Whole Woman's Health.
Plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Lawyering Project, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Texas, Morrison & Foerster LLP, and Austin attorney Christen Mason Hebert.
A timeline of Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson available here.
Quotes from plaintiffs and litigators:
Statement from Amy Hagstrom Miller, President and CEO of Whole Woman's Health and Whole Woman's Health Alliance:
"We have been fighting this ban for six long months, but the courts have failed us. All the while, our Texas clinics have been open - and that is a testament to the commitment and resilience of our staff and doctors. This ban does not change the need for abortion in Texas, it just blocks people from accessing the care they need. The situation is becoming increasingly dire, and now neighboring states--where we have been sending patients--are about to pass similar bans. Where will Texans go then? The more states that pass these bans, the harder it will be for anyone in this region to get abortion care. Texans deserve better."
Statement from Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:
"We are in a moment of crisis not only for reproductive rights but for our justice system and the rule of law. With this ruling, the sliver of this case that we were left with is gone. An unconstitutional ban on abortion after six weeks continues unchecked in the state of Texas. The courts have allowed Texas to nullify a constitutional right. We will continue to do everything in our power to right this wrong."
Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America:
"Today is a devastating day for people in Texas and anyone who believes in the right to control their own body, life, and future. Over and over again the courts have failed Texans, who have been stripped of their fundamental right to abortion for more than six months now. Because of the U.S. Supreme Court's repeated refusal to intervene for more than half a year, Texans are living in a state of sustained chaos, crisis, and confusion - and there is no end in sight. Tragically, this attack on reproductive freedom now continues uninterrupted in Texas and across the country. Politicians have the green light to move forward with their own unconstitutional abortion bans, decimating access to abortion state by state, region by region. We are already seeing these attacks in Idaho, Florida, Arizona, Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, West Virginia, and more states. Our patients and providers deserve so much better. Everyone -- no matter where you live or how much money you make -- deserves access to essential health care, free of barriers or political roadblocks."
Statement from Julia Kaye, staff attorney, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project:
"The courts have once again failed Texans. This is another devastating injustice, and people will continue to be denied the basic human dignity of being able to control their own body. Some have been able to overcome this cruel law through the extraordinary support of abortion funds and the reproductive rights and justice movement to get abortion care very early in Texas or travel out of state. But too many others have been denied abortion care altogether, and the brunt of this horrific law has fallen on the most marginalized people, including people of color and people with the fewest resources. The public cannot stand by while extremist politicians and cowardly courts strip away our civil rights. We won't stop fighting and we will do everything we can to stem the suffering that has resulted from this unprecedented crisis."
Statement from Blair Wallace, policy & advocacy strategist, ACLU of Texas:
"By dismissing our case and allowing overzealous politicians to win in their gambit to override the U.S. Constitution, the Texas Supreme Court ignored what is happening in its backyard. Every day, Texans, especially Black and Latinx Texans, are bearing the physical and mental health risks of being forced to carry a pregnancy to term against their will. And every day, in Texas, the Constitution's promise to protect us from these harms has been made meaningless. But we will never stop fighting in the streets and at the legislature for the justice and compassion so sorely lacking in SB 8 and in the shameful judicial decisions upholding it.
Statement from Rupali Sharma, Senior Counsel and Project Director at the Lawyering Project:
"For over half a year, S.B. 8 has forced Texans who need an abortion to uproot their lives amid a pandemic and travel out of state for care, significantly delaying their abortions. And that's the best-case scenario. Despite the extraordinary efforts of abortion funds and practical support organizations, all too many Texans ultimately lack the resources or mobility to access abortion at great distances from home and thus face the devastating consequences of unwanted pregnancy. Today's ruling means that this cruelty will continue at enormous costs to Texans and their families."
The Center for Reproductive Rights is a global human rights organization of lawyers and advocates who ensure reproductive rights are protected in law as fundamental human rights for the dignity, equality, health, and well-being of every person.
(917) 637-3600LATEST NEWS
Biden Labor Department Finalizes Pro-Worker Rules on Overtime, Retirement Savings
"Democrats are delivering for working people!" declared Rep. Pramila Jayapal as the AFL-CIO noted that GOP ex-President Donald Trump "gutted the rules that required overtime pay for millions of workers."
Apr 23, 2024
Roughly 4.3 million U.S. workers will now be eligible for overtime pay under a new rule finalized Tuesday by President Joe Biden's Labor Department—in stark contrast to his Republican predecessor's rules that severely limited the number of workers who were eligible for required compensation when they worked more than 40 hours per week.
Under the new rule, employers will be required to pay overtime premiums to salaried workers who work more than standard full-time hours if they earn less than $1,128 per week, or about $58,600 per year.
Former President Donald Trump, now the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, may now have to defend his 2020 rule that set the overtime pay threshold at just $35,500 per year, leaving out millions of workers.
U.S. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) noted that the updated rule was "a major piece" of the Executive Action Agenda released by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which she chairs.
"This is a HUGE pro-worker initiative by President Biden," said Jayapal. "Democrats are delivering for working people!"
Acting Labor Secretary Julie Su, who Biden has nominated to fill the role permanently, said it is "unacceptable" that lower-paid workers "are spending more time away from their families for no additional pay," while hourly workers are eligible for overtime pay.
"This rule will restore the promise to workers that if you work more than 40 hours in a week, you should be paid more for that time," said Su. "The Biden-Harris administration is following through on our promise to raise the bar for workers who help lay the foundation for our economic prosperity."
The Labor Department posted a chart on social media showing how under Trump's policy, only workers who earn less than $688 per week are eligible for required overtime pay. The full rule is set to go into effect in January 2025.
The chart offers a "good split screen with the GOP," saidSlate reporter Mark Joseph Stern.
"It isn't just that Trump's Department of Labor fought overtime pay—it's also that Trump appointed anti-labor judges who are about to block Biden's new rule," he said.
The former Republican president's appointed judges could also block a new Federal Trade Commission rule introduced on Tuesday, which blocks companies from including noncompete clauses in workers' contracts.
"Both reforms happened because of Biden and in spite of Republicans," said HuffPost labor reporter Dave Jamieson.
Along with the overtime rule, the Labor Department announced a new policy aimed at safeguarding people's retirement savings from their financial advisers' conflicts of interest.
The finalized retirement security rule requires "trusted investment advice providers to give prudent, loyal, honest advice free from overcharges," said the department. "These fiduciaries must adhere to high standards of care and loyalty when they recommend investments and avoid recommendations that favor the investment advice providers' interests—financial or otherwise—at the retirement savers' expense."
"Under the final rule and amended exemptions, financial institutions overseeing investment advice providers must have policies and procedures to manage conflicts of interest and ensure providers follow these guidelines," the agency said.
Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, said the nation's largest labor federation has "been pushing for the fiduciary and overtime rules since the Obama administration."
"It's really this simple," said Shuler. "Every worker deserves their fair share of the wealth they help create and every worker deserves to make sure their hard-earned money is secure."
Keep ReadingShow Less
More Than 4 Dozen Unions Demand 'End of Repression' of Columbia Protests
"The right to protest is necessary for every struggle, and the direct attack on this right is an attack on labor as well," said the labor groups. "An injury to one is an injury to all."
Apr 23, 2024
More than four dozen labor unions across numerous industries on Tuesday signed a letter expressing solidarity with students who have been suspended and arrested in recent days for protesting at Columbia University, including members of the on-campus labor group Student Workers of Columbia.
Unionized student workers in SWC-UAW 2710 were among the hundreds of picketers who have been protecting the Gaza Solidarity Encampment, which students set up at Columbia on April 17 to pressure administrators to divest from weapons manufacturers, tech companies, and other entities that benefit from Israel's apartheid policies in the occupied Palestinian territories.
The Ivy League institution, protesters say, will remain complicit in Israel's bombardment and blockade on Gaza, the killing of at least 34,183 Palestinians in the enclave since October, and the intentional starvation of dozens of people, until it entirely divests from Israel.
"As workers, we stand in solidarity with our union siblings in SWC-UAW 2710 who were arrested and face suspension," said the unions, including the Mother Jones Staff Union, Irvine Faculty Association, and Cleveland Jobs With Justice. "We call for their and their classmates' immediate reinstatement and for Columbia to drop all charges against them, both legal and academic. We deplore [Columbia president Minouche Shafik]'s actions and call for Columbia to immediately end the repression of protest."
The protests at Columbia—where more than 100 students were suspended, arrested for trespassing, and in some cases, evicted from their housing—have galvanized college students and faculty members at a growing number of universities in recent days.
Campus groups at the University of Minnesota and the University of Pittsburgh both announced early Tuesday that they were setting up their own encampments in solidarity with Columbia students and victims of the Israel Defense Forces' relentless attacks on Gaza, which the International Court of Justice said in January was "plausibly" a genocide.
After police arrested students at the University of Minnesota Tuesday afternoon and broke up the encampment, thousands of members of the school community rallied to demand that the university divest from all arms manufacturers.
Encampments were also erected Monday at University of California, Berkeley and University of Michigan.
Jessica Christian, a photojournalist for the San Francisco Chronicle, reported that students were stopping to "ask what supplies the campers need as they walk by to class" at Berkeley, where roughly 50 tents were set up on Tuesday.
On Monday night, dozens of students at Yale University and New York University were arrested for protesting, setting up encampments, and "disorderly conduct."
The arrests at Columbia last week have not stopped students and educators from speaking out against the administration. A new encampment was set up last Friday and hundreds of faculty members staged a walkout Monday in support of the students.
In their letter, the unions on Tuesday warned that "the repression and criminalization of activists, students, professors, and academic workers across the country are violations of our elementary rights to free speech and protest."
"The right to protest is necessary for every struggle, and the direct attack on this right is an attack on labor as well," said the unions, "An injury to one is an injury to all—if the Columbia students can be repressed for protesting, Columbia workers and all workers could be too. Workers stand in full solidarity with this student movement."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Plastics Summit 'Die-In' Highlights Need to Cut Production
"This week governments have a choice: Stand up to this slash-and-burn approach by agreeing to radically reduce plastic output, or let the world be held to ransom by a dying industry."
Apr 23, 2024
As the fourth round of talks for a global plastics treaty kicked off in the Canadian capital on Tuesday, campaigners with the corporate accountability group Ekō staged a die-in at Ottawa's Shaw Centre to demand an ambitious plan to reduce production.
"Plastic pollution has reached the snows of Antarctica, the deepest oceans, even the clouds in the sky—and still fossil fuel corporations are trying to ramp up production," explained Ekō campaign director Vicky Wyatt. "This week governments have a choice: Stand up to this slash-and-burn approach by agreeing to radically reduce plastic output, or let the world be held to ransom by a dying industry. It's very clear to people across the planet which way they need to go."
Demonstrators—some wearing fish masks to highlight how plastic pollution impacts marine biodiversity—gathered in front of a 28-foot banner that used plastic trash bags to spell out: "Plastic is poisoning us. Cut production now."
(Photo: Ben Powless/Survival Media Agency)
Participants in the die-in—which followed the weekend's "March to End the Plastic Era" through the Canadian city—held smaller signs with similar messages, demanding that governments and industry "stop fueling climate chaos."
As Common Dreamsreported last week, new research from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California shows that planet-heating pollution from the plastics industry is equivalent to that of about 600 coal-fired power plants, and 75% of the greenhouse gas emissions from plastic production are released before the plastic compounds are even created.
The protesters also highlighted that more than 180,000 Ekō members have signed a petition urging action on plastic pollution. The petition specifically calls for banning all plastic waste exports from the European Union and fully implementing the Basel Convention within the bloc, while the summit has a global focus and the plan is to have a treaty by the end of this year.
After countries agreed to draft a treaty two years ago, the latest talks in Kenya last year were flooded by fossil fuel and chemical lobbyists and ended with little progress, increasing attention on the Canadian meeting that began Tuesday and is scheduled to run through Monday.
"It's a crucial moment of this process," Andrés Gómez Carrión, chair of the negotiations and an Ecuadorian diplomat in the United Kingdom, toldReuters on Monday. "One of the biggest challenges is to define where the plastics lifecycle starts and define what sustainable production and consumption is."
Petrochemical-producing countries including China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia "have opposed mentioning production limits" while E.U. members, island nations, and Japan aim to "end plastic pollution by 2040," the news agency reported. The United States supports that timeline but "wants countries to set their own plans for doing so" and submit pledges to the United Nations.
"We are facing a global plastics crisis that requires urgent, global action. Reducing plastic production needs to be a core component of the solution," Christy Leavitt, campaign director at Oceana in the United States, said in a statement. "Countries must act now to stop the flood of plastic pollution that is harming our oceans, climate, health, and communities by starting at the source to reduce its production."
"The U.S. should support a strong, legally binding plastics treaty that addresses the full life cycle of this persistent pollutant from extraction and production to use and disposal," Leavitt added. "Now is the time for the United States to show its support to reduce plastic production, eliminate unnecessary single-use plastics, prohibit hazardous chemicals in plastics, and establish mandatory targets for reuse and refill systems. The United States and the world must act before it's too late."
Greenpeace last month installed a 15-foot monument outside the U.S. Capitol to send President Joe Biden a message.
"He can be the president who put an end to the plastic pollution crisis, or he can be the one who let it spiral out of control," Greenpeace oceans director John Hocevar said of Biden. "We're calling on him to stand up to plastic polluters like Exxon and Dow and put us on a greener and healthier path."
The petrochemical industry, Reuters noted, "argues that production caps would lead to higher prices for consumers, and that the treaty should address plastics only after they are made."
Sam Cossar-Gilbert of Friends of the Earth International emphasized the need to resist corporate pressure in a statement Tuesday.
"A people-powered movement and some governments are proposing ambitious steps to address the plastic problem, like regulating the harmful waste trade, single-use bans, and reducing global plastic production," said Cossar-Gilbert. "But multinational corporations will also be lobbying with their false solutions, distractions, and delays. Only by stamping out corporate capture can we deliver a new global treaty to end plastic pollution."
Mageswari Sangaralingam from the green group's Malaysian arm, Sahabat Alam Malaysia, stressed the need for strong waste management policies, given that Global South countries have become dumping grounds for richer nations' discarded plastic.
"Waste colonialism, whether in the form of trade in plastic waste and other hidden plastics, perpetuates social and environmental injustice," said Sangaralingam. "However, ending the plastic waste trade without reducing plastic production will likely trigger more dumping, cause toxic pollution, and contribute to the climate crisis. The global plastics treaty is an opportunity to plug loopholes and address policy gaps to end plastic pollution."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular