Reproductive Freedom

Featured

U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2024
Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States

Reproductive Freedom

Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States

Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by Idaho politicians seeking to disregard a federal statute 鈥 the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) 鈥 and put doctors in jail for providing pregnant patients necessary emergency medical care. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on this case on April 24, 2024. The Court鈥檚 ultimate decision will impact access to this essential care across the country.
Idaho And Moyle, Et Al. V. United States. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2023
Danco Laboratories, LLC, v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; U.S. FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

Reproductive Freedom

Danco Laboratories, LLC, v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; U.S. FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

The 桃子视频 joined over 200 reproductive health, rights, and justice organizations in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in support of an emergency request to stay a decision issued by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that severely restricted the use of mifepristone 鈥 a medication used in most abortions in this country 鈥 and threatened the innovation of new drugs and the ability of Americans to access lifesaving drugs.
Danco Laboratories, Llc, V. Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine; U.s. Fda V. Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2022
Bans Off Our Bodies Protest Sign

Reproductive Freedom

Dobbs v. Jackson Women鈥檚 Health Organization

The case concerns the constitutionality of a Mississippi law prohibiting abortions after the fifteenth week of pregnancy. The state used the case as a vehicle to ask the Supreme Court to take away the federal constitutional right to abortion it first recognized 50 years before in Roe v. Wade. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States accepted the state鈥檚 invitation and overturned Roe eliminating the federal constitutional right to abortion.
Dobbs V. Jackson Women鈥檚 Health Organization. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2022
RFP attorneys Alexa Kolbi-Molinas and Andrew Beck heading towards the Supreme Court to argue the case.

Reproductive Freedom

Cameron v. EMW Women鈥檚 Surgical Center

In 2018, the 桃子视频 and the 桃子视频of Kentucky filed a suit on behalf of Kentucky abortion providers and their patients challenging a state law banning physicians from providing a safe and medically proven abortion method called dilation and evacuation, or 鈥淒&E.鈥 If it were to take effect, this law would prevent many patients from being able to obtain an abortion altogether. After two courts held that the law is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court ruled in March 2022 that Kentucky Attorney General Cameron can continue his pursuit to push abortion out of reach by intervening in the underlying challenge to an abortion ban, which is proceeding in a lower court.
Cameron V. Emw Women鈥檚 Surgical Center. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson

Reproductive Freedom

Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson

The 桃子视频, the 桃子视频of Texas, and coalition partners filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of abortion providers and funds on July 13, 2021, challenging S.B. 8, a Texas law allowing private citizens to enforce a ban on abortion as early as six weeks in pregnancy鈥攂efore many know they are pregnant. The ACLU鈥檚 challenge made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court three times in as many months. After hearing oral arguments in the case, the Court issued a decision on December 10, 2021, that ended the most promising pathways to blocking the ban. The Supreme Court鈥檚 decision makes it more difficult to obtain adequate relief from the courts and gives states the green light to ban abortion using bounty-hunting schemes. Texas鈥 abortion ban will remain in effect until relief can be secured from a court.
Whole Woman's Health V. Jackson. Explore Case.

All Cases

121 Reproductive Freedom Cases

Beck v. Edwards
Court Case
May 2013

Reproductive Freedom

Beck v. Edwards

The 桃子视频, the Arkansas Civil Liberties Union, and the Center for Reproductive Rights have filed a lawsuit asking the court to block an Arkansas law that would ban almost all abortion care starting at 12 weeks of pregnancy.  
Explore case
Beck V. Edwards. Explore Case.
Court Case
May 2013
Beck v. Edwards

Reproductive Freedom

Beck v. Edwards

The 桃子视频, the Arkansas Civil Liberties Union, and the Center for Reproductive Rights have filed a lawsuit asking the court to block an Arkansas law that would ban almost all abortion care starting at 12 weeks of pregnancy.  
Beck V. Edwards. Explore Case.
Isaacson v. Horne
Court Case
May 2013

Reproductive Freedom

Isaacson v. Horne

The 桃子视频 and the 桃子视频of Arizona are challenging an Arizona law banning pre-viability abortions on behalf of an Arizona doctor whose patients include women in need of this essential medical care.  
Explore case
Isaacson V. Horne. Explore Case.
Court Case
May 2013
Isaacson v. Horne

Reproductive Freedom

Isaacson v. Horne

The 桃子视频 and the 桃子视频of Arizona are challenging an Arizona law banning pre-viability abortions on behalf of an Arizona doctor whose patients include women in need of this essential medical care.  
Isaacson V. Horne. Explore Case.
Lathrop, et al. v. Deal, et al.
Georgia
Dec 2012

Reproductive Freedom

Women's Rights

Lathrop, et al. v. Deal, et al.

The 桃子视频 and the 桃子视频of Georgia have filed a lawsuit challenging a Georgia law banning pre-viability abortions. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of three Georgia obstetrician-gynecologists whose patients include women in need of this essential medical care.
Explore case
Lathrop, Et Al. V. Deal, Et Al.. Explore Case.
Georgia
Dec 2012
Lathrop, et al. v. Deal, et al.

Reproductive Freedom

Women's Rights

Lathrop, et al. v. Deal, et al.

The 桃子视频 and the 桃子视频of Georgia have filed a lawsuit challenging a Georgia law banning pre-viability abortions. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of three Georgia obstetrician-gynecologists whose patients include women in need of this essential medical care.
Lathrop, Et Al. V. Deal, Et Al.. Explore Case.
桃子视频of Massachusetts v. Kathleen Sebelius, et al.
Massachusetts
Dec 2012

Reproductive Freedom

+2 桃子视频

桃子视频of Massachusetts v. Kathleen Sebelius, et al.

From April 2006 to October 2011, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has awarded the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) $2.5 million to $4 million annually to fund organizations that provide direct services to trafficking victims under the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act. HHS does this knowing that USCCB prohibits, based on its religious beliefs, grantees from using any of the federal funds to provide or refer for contraceptive or abortion services.
Explore case
Aclu Of Massachusetts V. Kathleen Sebelius, Et Al.. Explore Case.
Massachusetts
Dec 2012
桃子视频of Massachusetts v. Kathleen Sebelius, et al.

Reproductive Freedom

+2 桃子视频

桃子视频of Massachusetts v. Kathleen Sebelius, et al.

From April 2006 to October 2011, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has awarded the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) $2.5 million to $4 million annually to fund organizations that provide direct services to trafficking victims under the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act. HHS does this knowing that USCCB prohibits, based on its religious beliefs, grantees from using any of the federal funds to provide or refer for contraceptive or abortion services.
Aclu Of Massachusetts V. Kathleen Sebelius, Et Al.. Explore Case.
Planned Parenthood of Indiana Inc., et al. v. Commissioner of the Indiana State Department of Health
Indiana
Oct 2012

Reproductive Freedom

Planned Parenthood of Indiana Inc., et al. v. Commissioner of the Indiana State Department of Health

The 桃子视频 of Indiana, the 桃子视频and Planned Parenthood of Indiana have filed a lawsuit challenging three provisions of Indiana鈥檚 new, punitive abortion law (HB 1210) recently signed by Gov. Mitch Daniels. The law seeks to penalize health care providers that perform abortions, though they do so without federal dollars.
Explore case
Planned Parenthood Of Indiana Inc., Et Al. V. Commissioner Of The Indiana State Department Of Health. Explore Case.
Indiana
Oct 2012
Planned Parenthood of Indiana Inc., et al. v. Commissioner of the Indiana State Department of Health

Reproductive Freedom

Planned Parenthood of Indiana Inc., et al. v. Commissioner of the Indiana State Department of Health

The 桃子视频 of Indiana, the 桃子视频and Planned Parenthood of Indiana have filed a lawsuit challenging three provisions of Indiana鈥檚 new, punitive abortion law (HB 1210) recently signed by Gov. Mitch Daniels. The law seeks to penalize health care providers that perform abortions, though they do so without federal dollars.
Planned Parenthood Of Indiana Inc., Et Al. V. Commissioner Of The Indiana State Department Of Health. Explore Case.
1819
20
2122...