Gail Falk ’71 moved to New Haven to begin Yale Law School in 1968 — just as the women's rights movement was gaining traction in New England.
With her friends Ann Freedman ’71 and Barbara Brown ’71, Falk started a “Women and Law” organization at the Law School and, with members of New Haven Women’s Liberation, a women’s health group. “We started challenging the stereotypes that professors were using as examples in their classes,” she said. “We had virtual placards on our chests saying, ‘We are interested in women’s rights.’”
Not everyone welcomed the change Falk and her friends represented. But Thomas Emerson ’31, a Professor of Law and civil liberties expert at Yale Law School, was paying attention to their message.
In the summer of 1970, Emerson learned that the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) was set to come before Congress. He was approached to write a scholarly examination of the ERA’s possible impacts.
“Nobody had studied this seriously,” said Falk. “Instead of taking the assignment on himself, he made contact with us and asked if we would work with him on the article.” The three women began meeting with Emerson weekly, and the project became a yearlong seminar.
Emerson had a quality that felt rare at the time, said Falk: he respected his students as fellow collaborators.
“Once we got started, we were in it as complete equals. It was an example that I carried into my life [and that] shaped my personality. I developed a confidence in my ability to think about serious, important subjects and write about them,” she said.
In April 1971, Brown, Emerson, Falk, and Freedman published their nearly 100-page article, “The Equal Rights Amendment: A Constitutional Basis for Equal Rights for Women” in the Yale Law Journal. (At Emerson’s suggestion, their names were listed alphabetically, rather than with Professor Emerson’s name first.) When Congress met to consider the Equal Rights Amendment, the article was often cited by advocates in congressional testimony.
The same year saw the Women v. Connecticut lawsuit challenging the illegality of abortion in the state. Falk, then in her third year of law school, helped develop legal strategy for the group’s lawyers, including Catherine (Katie) Roraback ’48, whom Falk had been assisting with representation of Black Panther members.
Roraback became Falk’s friend and mentor. “There just weren’t that many independent women lawyers around. She wasn’t just a woman lawyer — she had her own office, she was a self-supporting woman, she thought for herself, and was tremendously effective in court,” said Falk.
It was tough to stay in touch with Roraback and Emerson once Falk moved south, where she eventually worked in the areas of coal miners’ rights and disability rights. But the connections remained. It wasn’t a coincidence that Falk and her husband named their children Tom and Katie.
Siegel was writing an article titled “Roe’s Roots: The Women’s Rights Claims That Engendered Roe” in 2008 when she read about the Yale Law students, including Falk, who’d led the social movement that galvanized Women v. Connecticut.
Siegel called Falk and asked whether she had any notes she could share. After rummaging in her basement, Falk produced an “amazing array” of organizing materials. Some of these can be read in Siegel’s Before Roe v. Wade: Voices that Shaped the Abortion Debate Before the Supreme Court’s Ruling (with Linda Greenhouse ’78 MSL).
Siegel’s writing on reproductive justice draws on the past to address present challenges; to share experience across generations, she regularly works with students and recent alumni.
Together with her former students Melissa Murray ’02 (now Frederick I. and Grace Stokes Professor of Law at NYU), Serena Mayeri ’01 (Arlin M. Adams Professor of Constitutional Law and Professor of History at Penn Carey Law), and Rachel Tuchman ’17, Siegel filed an amicus brief in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), arguing that the Equal Protection Clause provides a basis for abortion rights.
Murray, Mayeri, and Siegel collaborated on a subsequent publication explaining the brief ’s arguments, which was published in the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law in 2023.
This work grew out of call-and-response across several generations of legal thinkers and writers, which is as it should be, in Siegel’s view.