Khiara M. Bridges is a professor of law at UC Berkeley School of Law. She has written many articles concerning, race, class, reproductive rights, and the intersection of the three. Her scholarship has appeared or will soon appear in the Harvard Law Review, Stanford Law Review, the Columbia Law Review, the California Law Review, and the Virginia Law Review, among others.
Please join the Lillian Goldman Law Library and the Program for the Study of Reproductive Justice for a panel discussion of "Reproductive Rights and Justice Stories" and the future of this area of the law. Editors and contributors include professors Linda Greenhouse ’78 M.S.L., Melissa Murray ’02, Douglas NeJaime, Kate Shaw, and Reva Siegel ’86. Moderated by Emily Bazelon ’00.
Dinner will be served at 6:05pm
The Constitutional Case Against Defining Infertility, Faren Tang, Reproductive Justice Fellow, Program for the Study of Reproductive Justice at Yale
Legal definitions of infertility, usually for the purposes of state insurance mandates, rely on a faulty distinction between “medical” and “social” infertility and logically inconsistent double-standards for different-sex couples, same-sex couples, and single non-partnered individuals. But fertility coverage mandates, like all laws, must comport with basic Constitutional principles of equal protection and equal right to liberty.
This chapter tells the story of Madrigal v. Quilligan, an unpublished decision from a California federal district court refusing to remedy sterilization abuse in the early 1970s. After a whistleblower leaked evidence of rampant sterilization abuse at the Los Angeles County USC Medical Center, ten women (the Madrigal Ten) filed a lawsuit alleging that medical personnel systematically coerced Mexican-American women into submitting to sterilization. The case dramatically altered public consciousness and public policy on coerced sterilization.
After the confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh, many have predicted the reversal, or at least the complete hollowing out, of Roe v. Wade in near future. Indeed, despite the Supreme Court’s stay of a restrictive Louisiana abortion law last month, there are at least 20 abortion cases that are currently in the pipeline to the highest court, any of which could gut women’s right to reproductive autonomy. What are the devils hidden in the details of so-called “TRAP” and other anti-abortion laws? What are the up-to-date states and prospects of related lawsuits?
We Will Be Citizens: from AIDS Activism to Mobilizing for Global Health Justice, Gregg Gonsalves, Asst. Prof. Yale School of Public Health
Abstract: In public health, we talk about how social and economic determinants drive health outcomes. But what if we go further and think about how the social and economic policies that make us sick are established in the first place? This takes us into politics, how we are governed and by whom, into the political determinants of health. The AIDS epidemic provides a lesson in the collision of late 20th century free-market fundamentalism, the politics of race, gender and sexuality with a new, deadly virus.
Violeta Canaves, Professor of Constitutional Law (Universidad Nacional del Litoral) LL.M. '15 and JSD Candidate (Yale Law School). Expert Witness during the Argentine House of Representatives hearings on the Decriminalization of Abortion Bill (2018)
Pregnancy, Power, and Professional Speech: NIFLA v. Becerra and the Deregulatory Uses of the First Amendment
Professors Robert Post and Amy Kapczynski will be joined by Julie Rikelmen, Senior Director, Litigation at the Center for Reproductive Rights, to discuss last summer’s opinion in NIFLA v. Becerra, 585 U.S. ---, 138 S. Ct.