Podcasts about health organization

 It's Friday, May 30th, A.D. 2025. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 125 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Adam McManus Christian burials denied in Odisha State, India In mid-May, villagers in Odisha State, India opposed the burial of a deceased Christian, reports International Christian Concern. Their claim? A Christian funeral would defile the gods and the land of the village. Sadly, authorities were unable to convince villagers to allow the burial, and the body was taken to another location. Although Christian burials have long been denied in India, these denials are increasingly occurring as a method of persecuting Christians in Odisha State. Three independent investigations conducted in Odisha between March and April pointed to an alarming rise in the number of Christians denied burial rights. The investigations concluded that the absence of state laws allocating burial land for Christians has enabled the trend. FBI investigates leaked Dobbs Supreme Court ruling FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino announced Monday that he and FBI Director Kash Patel are going to “re-open” an investigation into the consequential 2022 leak of the U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, reports Life News. On May 2, 2022, Politico published a draft of a Supreme Court opinion, authored in February by Justice Samuel Alito, in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The official ruling was not released until June 24, 2022. The draft opinion made it evident that the Supreme Court was all but certain to rule in favor of the Mississippi pro-life law at the center of the case. A majority of justices on the Supreme Court were prepared to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision which had extended broad federal legal protections to the practice of abortion. Politico cited a “person familiar with the court's deliberations” to confirm that Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett had already voted in favor of Alito's opinion following oral arguments in December of 2021, yielding a five-justice majority to strike down Roe and Casey, as the pro-abortion precedents are known. Pro-abortion activists made clear that they intended to target pro-life pregnancy resource centers and Catholic parishes in response to the Dobbs leak. Indeed, more than 100 pro-life centers and churches were firebombed, smashed, ransacked, or vandalized with pro-abortion graffiti and threatening messages, reported Fox News.   Then, five weeks after the Dobbs leak, but before the official ruling was announced, a man flew from California to D.C. with the intention of going on a killing spree. His target? The pro-life Supreme Court justices. Nicholas Roske went to Kavanaugh's house first located in Montgomery County, Maryland. He was armed with a pistol and equipped with gear to break into the justice's house undetected. Appeals court paused block of Trump's retaliatory tariffs A federal appeals court granted the Trump administration's request to temporarily pause the Wednesday ruling of the  U.S. Court of International Trade which struck down most of President Donald Trump's tariffs, reports CNBC. The judges of the trade court had found that the 1970s-era law Trump had invoked to enact those tariffs, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, does not “confer such unbounded authority” to presidents. The nationwide, permanent block they imposed covered all of the retaliatory tariffs that Trump issued in early April as part of his sweeping “Liberation Day” plan to reshape international trade with the rest of the world. Without a doubt, the Wednesday ruling destabilized a pillar of Trump's economic agenda. Illinois House approves physician-assisted suicide bill And finally, on Thursday, the Illinois House narrowly passed a controversial physician-assisted suicide bill (SB 1950 Amendment 2) by a vote of 63 to 42, with two members cowardly voting “present,” reports the Illinois Family Institute. Oddly enough, 11 state representatives did not cast a vote on the legislation. David Smith, the Executive Director, prayed this prayer on a video which was shared with fellow Christians. SMITH: “I pray, Lord, that many of these lawmakers who are on the fence would choose to err on the side of life and not on death. Lord, I pray that your people would rise up throughout the state of Illinois. I pray that many church leaders would speak up and let their state lawmakers know that this is unacceptable. Illinois should never accept or normalize suicide!” At its April 2025 annual meeting, the Illinois State Medical Society overwhelmingly voted to oppose legalizing physician-assisted suicide. This decision reflects the stance of most Illinois doctors against prescribing lethal medications. They took an oath to do no harm and certainly not to provide the means for their patients to end their lives. If you live in Illinois, send an email to your State Senator here. Scripture tells us that every person is created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27), and thus each life holds immeasurable value. Moreover, Exodus 20:13 records this command: "Thou shall not murder." Close And that's The Worldview on this Friday, May 30th, in the year of our Lord 2025. Subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

The Rich Zeoli Show- Hour 4: 6:05pm- On Tuesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr.—alongside FDA Commissioner Marty Makary and NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya—announced the CDC will no longer recommend Covid-19 vaccination for health children and pregnant women, removing the vaccines from the immunization schedule. 6:15pm- Deputy Director of the FBI Dan Bongino announced that the agency will continue several unresolved investigations, including who brought cocaine into the White House in 2023, the pipe bombs left at the RNC and DNC offices in January of 2021, and who is responsible for leaking the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. 6:30pm- In a series of articles published over the weekend, The New York Times examined the Democrat Party's continued struggles appealing to the American electorate. Shane Goldmacher writes that Democrats “are still searching for the path forward”—noting that the party spent $20 million studying their “erosion” of support with “young men” specifically. In another article, Goldmacher—alongside June Kim and Christine Zhang—evaluate “how Donald Trump has remade America's political landscape.” They document that 435 counties across the country became more “Democratic” from 2012 and 2024—however, 2,678 counties became more “Republican.” Further complicating matters is the 2030 census which is expected to cause comfortably blue states to lose electoral votes as citizens move to red states. You can read the articles here: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/25/us/politics/democratic-party-voters.html. And here: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/05/25/us/politics/trump-politics-democrats.html.

In Part 1 of our interview with Dr. Priscilla Coleman, a renowned professor of human development and family studies, we delve deeper into her extensive research on the psychological effects of abortion on women. Dr. Coleman discusses the methodologies behind her studies, addresses common criticisms, and shares insights from her meta-analyses that have been pivotal in shaping the discourse around abortion and mental health.​ It also deals with the societal and policy implications of her findings, offering viewers a comprehensive understanding of the complexities involved. Whether you're a student, researcher, policymaker, or someone interested in the nuanced aspects of this topic, this interview provides valuable perspectives grounded in empirical research.   Subscribe to our newsletter to get this amazing report: Refuting the Top 5 Gay Myths https://ruthinstitute.org/refute-the-top-five-myths/   Dr. Priscilla Coleman is a developmental psychologist and retired Professor of Human Development and Family Studies (HDFS) at Bowling Green State University (BGSU). She is now the Science Director for The International Institute for Reproductive Loss (IIRL) (https://www.iirl.net/). The mission of IIRL is to provide, develop, and maintain evidence-based resources on the personal and relational impact of reproductive loss for lay and professional audiences. Dr. Coleman has published over 60 peer-reviewed journal articles, with most on the psychology of abortion (decision-making and mental health outcomes). She has shared her research and analysis of peer-reviewed studies in numerous countries (Australia, Canada, Chili, Ecuador, England, Germany, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Poland, Portugal, and Scotland) to wide-ranging audiences, most notably in Parliament Houses as medical and government personnel evaluated current and future laws regulating abortion.   Timeline of Events 2008: APA Task Force Report on Abortion. 2008-2010, recruitment for Turnaway Study. 2011. Coleman publishes article in British Journal of Psychiatry. June 2, 2020: A book by one of the principal investigators, Diana Greene Foster, is published, The Turnaway Study: Ten years, a Thousand Women, and the Consequences of Having—or Being Denied—an Abortion. June 17, 2022: Coleman publishes Critique of the “Turnaway Study.” In Frontiers in Psychology. June 24, 2022, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. September 2022: calls for retraction of BJP article October 5, 2022, Frontiers publishes “Expression of Concern” regarding the article. October 13, 2022. Coleman retains legal representation. December 22, 2022. Coleman receives notice that Frontiers plan to retract the article. December 23, 2022. Dr. Coleman's attorneys sent a letter to the Frontiers in Psychology Editorial staff. December 26, 2022 Dr. Coleman's Frontiers article was retracted. December 29, 2022 Dr. Coleman's attorneys sent a letter of objection to the Frontiers in Psychology May 2023: Cambridge Press, publisher of the British Journal of Psychiatry, ruled in Coleman's favor and declined to retract.   Have a question or a comment? Leave it in the comments, and we'll get back to you!   Subscribe to our YouTube playlist:  @RuthInstitute  Follow us on Social Media: https://www.instagram.com/theruthinstitute https://twitter.com/RuthInstitute https://www.facebook.com/TheRuthInstitute/ https://theruthinstitute.locals.com/newsfeed   Press: NC Register: https://www.ncregister.com/author/jennifer-roback-morse Catholic Answers: https://www.catholic.com/profile/jennifer-roback-morse The Stream: https://stream.org/author/jennifer-roback-morse/ Crisis Magazine: https://crisismagazine.com/author/jennifer-roeback-morse   Father Sullins' Reports on Clergy Sexual Abuse: https://ruthinstitute.org/resource-centers/father-sullins-research/   Buy Dr. Morse's Books: The Sexual State: https://ruthinstitute.org/product/the-sexual-state-2/ Love and Economics: https://ruthinstitute.org/product/love-and-economics-it-takes-a-family-to-raise-a-village/ Smart Sex: https://ruthinstitute.org/product/smart-sex-finding-life-long-love-in-a-hook-up-world/ 101 Tips for a Happier Marriage: https://ruthinstitute.org/product/101-tips-for-a-happier-marriage/ 101 Tips for Marrying the Right Person: https://ruthinstitute.org/product/101-tips-for-marrying-the-right-person/   Listen to our podcast: Apple Podcasts - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ruth-institute-podcast/id309797947 Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/1t7mWLRHjrCqNjsbH7zXv1   Subscribe to our newsletter to get this amazing report: Refuting the Top 5 Gay Myths https://ruthinstitute.org/refute-the-top-five-myths/   Get the full interview by joining us for exclusive, uncensored content on Locals: https://theruthinstitute.locals.com/support

Advocates say Milwaukee could lose over $1 million in federal funding for HIV testing, prevention and treatment if the proposed cuts CDC's Division of HIV happen.

Juno is arguably the most well-known depiction of adoption in pop culture... but what messages does it really send about relinquishment, teen pregnancy, and reproductive justice? Is adoption truly the “perfect alternative” to abortion as Juno would have us believe, or does this charmingly complicated 2007 film gloss over the realities of birth mothers and family separation? This week, we're joined by Dr. Gretchen Sisson, sociologist and author of Relinquished: The Politics of Adoption and the Privilege of American Motherhood, to break down Juno's thorny politics on choice, motherhood, and adoption. GUEST DETAILS Gretchen Sisson, Ph.D., is a qualitative sociologist studying abortion and adoption at Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH) in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences at University of California, San Francisco. Her research was cited in the Supreme Court's dissent in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. She is the author of Relinquished: The Politics of Adoption and the Privilege of American Motherhood. CONNECT WITH US Instagram: @sexedwithdbpodcastTikTok: @sexedwithdbTwitter: @sexedwithdb Threads: @sexedwithdbpodcast YouTube: Sex Ed with DB ROM-COM VOM SEASON 11 SPONSORS: Lion's Den, Uberlube, Magic Wand, + Arya. Get discounts on all of DB's favorite things here! GET IN TOUCH Email: sexedwithdb@gmail.comSubscribe to our newsletter for behind-the-scenes content and answers to your sexual health questions! FOR SEXUAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS Check out DB's workshop: "Building A Profitable Online Sexual Health Brand" ABOUT THE SHOW Sex Ed with DB is your go-to podcast for smart, science-backed sex education—delivering trusted insights from top experts on sex, sexuality, and pleasure. Empowering, inclusive, and grounded in real science, it's the sex ed you've always wanted. SEASON 11 TEAM Creator, Host & Executive Producer: Danielle Bezalel (DB) Producer: Sadie Lidji Communications Lead: Cathren Cohen Marketing Coordinator: Alex Bateman Logo Design: Evie Plumb (@cliterallythebest)

On today's PoM Podcast Episode I sat down with Bradley Pierce a constitutional attorney and the president of the Foundation to Abolish Abortion, Bradley has nearly two decades of experience advocating for the right to life and has been instrumental in drafting legislation across more than 30 states to protect these vital rights, including numerous equal protection bills aimed at abolishing abortion. Notably, he was admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court and represented 21 organizations in the landmark Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization case.To learn more check out these links: https://faa.life/https://www.abortionfree.com/Secure your spot in Tribe XVI: https://www.thepursuitofmanliness.com/gear/p/tribe-xvi Build your own local Tribe with Tribe Builder: https://www.thepursuitofmanliness.com/gear/p/tribe-builderRegister for our 2025 Fall Men's Retreat: https://www.thepursuitofmanliness.com/gear/p/2025-mens-retreatThis podcast is sponsored by Dark Water Woodwork. Dark Water Woodwork is offering a discount code exclusively for the podcast listeners. Use the discount code "PSALM824" to save 15% off of your next beard oil purchase. https://www.darkwaterkc.comSupport the show

Subscriber-only episodeOn today's PoM Podcast Episode I sat down with Bradley Pierce a constitutional attorney and the president of the Foundation to Abolish Abortion, Bradley has nearly two decades of experience advocating for the right to life and has been instrumental in drafting legislation across more than 30 states to protect these vital rights, including numerous equal protection bills aimed at abolishing abortion. Notably, he was admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court and represented 21 organizations in the landmark Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization case.To learn more check out these links: https://faa.life/https://www.abortionfree.com/Secure your spot in Tribe XVI: https://www.thepursuitofmanliness.com/gear/p/tribe-xvi Build your own local Tribe with Tribe Builder: https://www.thepursuitofmanliness.com/gear/p/tribe-builderRegister for our 2025 Fall Men's Retreat: https://www.thepursuitofmanliness.com/gear/p/2025-mens-retreatThis podcast is sponsored by Dark Water Woodwork. Dark Water Woodwork is offering a discount code exclusively for the podcast listeners. Use the discount code "PSALM824" to save 15% off of your next beard oil purchase. https://www.darkwaterkc.com

Purchase a copy of The Exvangelicals: Loving, Living, and Leaving the White Evangelical Church: https://amzn.to/4fVoape✖️✖️✖️Sarah McCammon is a National Political Correspondent for NPR and co-host of the NPR Politics Podcast. Her work focuses on political, social and cultural divides in America, including abortion policy and the intersections of politics and religion. She's also a frequent guest host for NPR news programs.She has covered several presidential elections, including the 2016 campaign, when she reported on the rise of the Trump movement, divisions within the Republican Party over its future, and the role of religion in those debates. McCammon's reporting has documented the growing political power of the religious right culminating with the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, efforts by abortion rights advocates to push back, and the rising tide of white Christian nationalism.She's frequently called upon to cover breaking news events and national politics. Her work has won numerous awards, among them a 2023 Edward R. Murrow Award for her coverage of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, a 2023 Wilbur Award for religion reporting, a Gracie Award in 2020 for her reporting on reproductive rights, and a National Press Club Journalism Award for team coverage of the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting in 2018.McCammon is the author of The Exvangelicals: Loving, Living, and Leaving the White Evangelical Church, a 2024 book that is part memoir and part journalism, about the movement of people who grew up inside the powerful evangelical subculture and ultimately left in response to its increasing politicization.She has appeared on numerous television programs including CNN's Inside Politics, MSNBC's All In with Chris Hayes, PBS Newshour, and CSPAN's Washington Journal.Prior to joining NPR in 2015, she reported for NPR Member stations in Georgia, Iowa, and Nebraska. She began her career as newspaper reporter in the Chicago area.McCammon grew up in Kansas City, Missouri and is a graduate of Trinity College in Deerfield, Illinois.✖️✖️✖️If you or someone you know has experienced abuse, visit courage365.org/need-help✖️✖️✖️Support the Show: Patreon.com/PreacherBoys✖️✖️✖️CONNECT WITH THE SHOW:preacherboyspodcast.comhttps://www.youtube.com/@PreacherBoyshttps://www.facebook.com/preacherboysdoc/https://twitter.com/preacherboysdochttps://www.instagram.com/preacherboyspodhttps://www.tiktok.com/@preacherboyspodTo connect with a community that shares the Preacher Boys Podcast's mission to expose abuse in the IFB, join the OFFICIAL Preacher Boys Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1403898676438188/✖️✖️✖️The content presented in this video is for informational and educational purposes only. All individuals and entities discussed are presumed innocent until proven guilty through due legal process. The views and opinions expressed are those of the speakers.This episode is sponsored by/brought to you by BetterHelp. Give online therapy a try at betterhelp.com/PreacherBoys and get on your way to being your best self.Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/preacher-boys-podcast/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Welcome solo and group practice owners! We are Liath Dalton and Evan Dumas, your co-hosts of Group Practice Tech. In our latest episode, we share an overview of the big stories, developments, and regulatory changes that will impact group practices in 2025. We discuss: A proposed change to the HIPAA Security Rule, and how it will impact group practices OCR resuming their HIPAA Compliance Audit program Updates on telehealth provisions and exceptions for Medicare and important dates to know Updates on the Counseling Compact and the Social Work Licensure Compact Upcoming regulatory changes for AI use and our current recommendations Listen here: https://personcenteredtech.com/group/podcast/ For more, visit our website. Resources: Proposed New Rule From HHS: HIPAA Security Rule Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Strengthen Cybersecurity for Electronic Protected Health Information Resumption of OCR's (the HIPAA Regulators) HIPAA Audit Program New Rule: HIPAA Privacy Rule Final Rule to Support Reproductive Health Care Privacy: Fact Sheet Model Attestation for a Requested Use or Disclosure of Protected Health Information Potentially Related to Reproductive Health Care New Rule: Fact Sheet 42 CFR Part 2 Final Rule Telehealth Update: DEA/HHS Temporary Rule, Medicare Coverage of Telehealth Services, and What to Watch For in 2025 Medicare Telehealth Flexibilities Get a Three-Month Lifeline JPM2025: Regulation of artificial intelligence: Navigating a new frontier in health care | JD Supra   PCT Resources: Relevant on-demand, legal-ethical CE training: Law & Ethics of Clinical Documentation for a post Roe world Addresses the practical applications of the US Supreme Court's ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, with particular focus on the impacts this decision has on client confidentiality and documentation of clinical services Relevant on-demand, legal-ethical CE training: The Evolving Legal-Ethical Standard of Care for the Clinical Use of Artificial Intelligence in Mental Health Gain insights into the benefits and challenges of incorporating AI technologies into their practice, understand the clinical implications, and learn how to navigate legal and ethical guidelines while maintaining compliance with HIPAA regulations. PCT's Comprehensive HIPAA Security Compliance Program (discounted) bundles: For Group Practices For Solo Practitioners PCT's HIPAA Risk Analysis & Risk Mitigation Planning service for mental health group practices -- care for your practice using our supportive, shame-free risk analysis and mitigation planning service. You'll have your Risk Analysis done within 2 hours, performed by a PCT consultant, using a tool built specifically for mental health group practice, and a mitigation checklist to help you reduce your risks. Group Practice Care Premium weekly (live & recorded) direct support & consultation service, Group Practice Office Hours -- including monthly session with therapist attorney Eric Ström, JD PhD LMHC + assignable staff HIPAA Security Awareness: Bring Your Own Device training + access to Device Security Center with step-by-step device-specific tutorials & registration forms for securing and documenting all personally owned & practice-provided devices (for *all* team members at no per-person cost) + assignable staff HIPAA Security Awareness: Remote Workspaces training for all team members + access to Remote Workspace Center with step-by-step tutorials & registration forms for securing and documenting Remote Workspaces (for *all* team members at no per-person cost) + more

Do you want to truly understand the impact of international adoption and the complex web of privilege and bias it entails? If you're seeking the solution to this, then join me as we delve into this eye-opening conversation that will increase your understanding of privilege and bias in adoption practices. Let's uncover the truth together. In this episode, you will be able to: Understand how international adoption policies impact children's lives. Gain insight into the support available for birth mothers considering adoption. Uncover the mental health effects of adoption on adoptees. Explore the intersection of adoption and reproductive rights. Recognize the privilege and bias in domestic adoption practices. My special guest is Dr. Gretchen Sisson Gretchen Sisson, a research sociologist and author of "The Politics of Adoption and the Privilege of American Motherhood," is a respected figure at the University of California, San Francisco's Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health ANSIRH) in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive sciences. Her work on adoption relinquishment after abortion denial has been cited in the dissent for the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs vs Jackson, Women's Health Organization, and has garnered attention from renowned publications such as the Washington Post, Time Magazine, the Nation, NPR, New York Magazine, Vox, and Mother Jones. With a focus on the mental, physical, and financial aspects of women's experiences following pregnancy, Gretchen's expertise sheds light on the complex intersection of adoption and reproductive rights, providing valuable insights for prospective adoptive parents considering transracial adoption. The key moments in this episode are: 00:00:02 - Introduction to the Podcast 00:03:49 - The Impact of Adoption Relinquishment 00:11:19 - Cultural Narratives and Adoption 00:13:38 - International Adoption and Child Trafficking 00:14:43 - Changing Landscape of International Adoption 00:15:11 - The Decline of International Adoption 00:17:01 - The Complexities of Transracial Adoption 00:23:08 - Intersection of Adoption and Reproductive Health 00:26:25 - Nuances of Abortion and Adoption 00:29:16 - Reflection on Adoption Choices 00:30:55 - Impact of Social Safety Nets 00:34:29 - Unique American Domestic Adoption System 00:38:31 - Narratives and Privilege in Adoption 00:41:35 - Unpaid Labor and Normative Ideals 00:43:56 - Challenges of Safe Housing for Pregnant Women 00:44:18 - Coercive Tactics of Adoption Agencies 00:46:35 - Advice for Adoptive Parents 00:49:00 - Overcoming Shame and Guilt 00:55:35 - Embracing Differences and Deepening Understanding 00:58:09 - Importance of Good Relationships 00:58:18 - Spreading Joy and Making a Difference 00:58:30 - You Matter 00:58:32 - Empowering Others "We don't value any of those things that families in poverty, that parents living in poverty can give their children, because we believe this middle class ideal is so, you know, undeniably desirable." - Gretchen Sisson Episode with Cameron Lee Small on Adoptees Connect with us: https://www.aworldofdifferencepodcast.com Linkedin YouTube FaceBook Instagram Threads Patreon Bluesky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this week's episode of then & now, we present a recording of a recent event hosted by the UCLA History Department, "Why History Matters: Reproductive Rights and Justice." This event brought together experts to explore the far-reaching effects of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision in June 2022. Hosted by Kevin Terraciano, the conversation delves into the historical misuse of legal doctrines to limit reproductive freedoms and calls for a comprehensive reproductive justice framework that extends beyond abortion to include the right to have or not have children and to raise children in safe environments. Professor Cary Franklin critiques the Supreme Court's "history and tradition" test in Dobbs, arguing it distorts historical perspectives on liberty and equality, while Dean Alexandra Minna Stern discusses the lasting impacts of eugenic sterilization on marginalized groups, emphasizing how patterns of reproductive oppression persist today. Professor Elizabeth O'Brien examines Mexico's recent Supreme Court rulings decriminalizing abortion and highlights grassroots activism's role in shaping a broader framework for reproductive rights in Latin America. In the U.S., maternal mortality and preventable deaths have risen sharply since the Dobbs decision, underscoring the panel's call for historical research to inform advocacy as surveillance and criminalization of reproductive health grow. Through these comparative perspectives, the discussion powerfully illustrates how understanding historical contexts can guide efforts to protect and expand reproductive rights in the U.S.Kevin Terraciano is a Professor and the Department Chair of History at UCLA. He specializes in Latin American history, especially Mexico and the Indigenous cultures and languages of central and southern Mexico. Among many books and translations, he is the author of The Mixtecs of Colonial Oaxaca: Ñudzahui History, Sixteenth through Eighteenth Centuries, a comprehensive study of Mixtec society and their adaptation to colonial rule.Cary Franklin is the McDonald/Wright Chair of Law at UCLA and serves as the faculty director of the Williams Institute at UCLA as well as the Center on Reproductive Health, Law, and Policy. Her work has appeared in numerous publications including the Harvard Law Review, the Michigan Law Review, the NYU Law Review, the Supreme Court Review, the Virginia Law Review, and the Yale Law Journal.Alexandra Minna Stern is a professor of English and history and the Dean of UCLA's Division of Humanities. She co-directs the Sterilization and Social Justice Lab, which studies eugenic sterilization practices in the U.S. and their impact on marginalized groups. She is the author of the award-winning Eugenic Nation: Faults and Frontiers of Better Breeding in Modern America, and the author of Telling Genes: The Story of Genetic Counseling in America, which was named a Choice 2013 Outstanding Academic Title in Health Sciences.Elizabeth O'Brien is an Assistant Professor in the UCLA Meyer and Renee Luskin Department of History, specializing in the history of reproductive health in Mexico. Professor O'Brien is also a member of the cross-field group in the History of Gender and Sexuality. Professor O'Brien's 2023 book on colonialism and reproductive healthcare in Mexico, Surgery and Salvation: The 

Democracy in Question? is brought to you by:• Central European University: CEU• The Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: AHCD• The Podcast Company: scopeaudio Follow us on social media!• Central European University: @CEU• Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: @GVAGrad_AHDC Subscribe to the show. If you enjoyed what you listened to, you can support us by leaving a review and sharing our podcast in your networks!  GlossaryDobbs v. Jackson (24:03 or p.7 in the transcript)Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, legal decision in which the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2022 overturned two historic Supreme Court rulings, Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992), which had respectively established and affirmed a constitutional right to obtain an abortion. Specifically, Roe v. Wade had recognized a constitutional right to obtain an abortion before approximately the end of the second trimester of pregnancy (which the Court understood as the usual point of fetal viability). Caseyhad affirmed the “essential holding” of Roe, which it had described in part as “a recognition of the right of the woman to choose to have an abortion before viability and to obtain it without undue interference from the State.” As Caseyexplained, a state unduly interferes in the right to pre-viability abortion if its restrictions “impose…an undue burden on a woman's ability to make this decision” or present “a substantial obstacle to the woman's effective right to elect the procedure.” Notwithstanding Roe and Casey and other Supreme Court rulings reaffirming a constitutional right to pre-viability abortion, Mississippi, the state appellant in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, claimed that laws banning pre-viability abortion are not necessarily unconstitutional. States may “prohibit elective abortions before viability,” the state argued, “because nothing in constitutional text, structure, history, or tradition supports a right to abortion.” Dobbs drew national attention because it overturned nearly 50 years of judicial precedent and effectively enabled states to impose drastic restrictions on the availability of abortion and even to ban it completely. source 

Hey everyone, this isn't my normal episode! today we're diving into the facts behind Roe v. Wade, one of the most pivotal Supreme Court cases in American history. We'll explore the origins of the case, how it changed abortion rights and healthcare laws in the U.S., and the recent developments after the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision. This episode is all about facts—no opinions, just a straightforward look at the legal and historical context so listeners can stay informed. Whether you're looking to understand the background, recent changes, or the implications for the future, this episode breaks down everything you need to know.”Resources for Further Research: 1. Oyez Project – Roe v. Wade Case Summary: Provides a detailed summary and breakdown of the Roe v. Wade case, including the Court's reasoning and opinions. 2. U.S. Supreme Court – Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (Opinion): Official opinion document for the Dobbs case that overturned Roe v. Wade, allowing states to regulate abortion laws independently. 3. Pew Research Center – Public Opinion and State Reactions: Pew's reports offer insight into state-level responses to the Dobbs decision and data on public opinion regarding abortion rights. 4. Guttmacher Institute – State Abortion Policy: Tracks current abortion laws and policies across U.S. states, including recent updates since Dobbs. 5. NPR – Historical Impact of Roe v. Wade: NPR's archive provides context on how Roe v. Wade influenced healthcare, politics, and public discourse over the decades.These sources will help explore the history, legal opinions, and current landscape surrounding abortion rights in the U.S.

[SEGMENT 1-1] Harris on internal polls 1   The Vegas betting line is 2-to-1 in favor of Trump. The people have spoken.   Kamala Harris would be nowhere without a crooked machine. That machine installed Biden, the surreptitiously disposed of him and replaced him with an even more worthless politician. I don't believe Biden actually thinks he won the 2020 election, but then again he is a braindead moron. So the idea that Kamala Harris believes the hype surrounding her campaign is equally incredulous. But in keeping with the bullsh*t that Democrats spin, when Kamala Harris was asked about her internal polls she lied. [X] SB – Kamala Harris on internal polling instincts   The same instincts that got her a healthy one percent of the Democrat vote when she ran in 2020? The reason why Harris didn't want to answer the question directly is because of her actual internal poll numbers. Harris is losing this election. And not by a couple of percentage points either. Harris is losing in two major ways. First, she's losing beyond the margin of error that pollsters so often mention. Second, she's losing beyond the margin of cheating.  [SEGMENT 1-2] Harris on internal polls 2 You don't expect Harris or the Democrats to tell you the truth about the race, right? Use your common sense for just a bit, and ask yourself who America wants righting the ship: the person who demonstrated he could do it, while carrying the 800-lb gorilla of the Democrats and RINOs doing everything to could to subvert him and he was STILL SUCCESSFUL. OR Sista Girl who is so incompetent, Democrats know she would never have won a primary.     You simply can't have a voter revolt of this magnitude and think Harris can win. She's lost massive percentages in almost all major Democrat voting blocs.   Internal polling and recent media analyses reveal that the Harris-Walz campaign is experiencing mixed results and facing unique challenges in key battleground states. Despite a small lead over Trump in national polls, some reports suggest that enthusiasm among certain voter demographics, particularly younger and minority groups in states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Arizona, remains lukewarm. Campaign insiders and Democratic strategists are concerned that Harris's outreach hasn't fully tapped into these communities, leading to frustrations and accusations of a disorganized or lackluster state-level campaign approach. This disconnect has been particularly noticeable in Pennsylvania, where Democratic leaders have voiced concerns about Harris's campaign structure and outreach efforts, worrying that the campaign's underperformance may impact voter turnout in crucial areas like Philadelphia and Pittsburgh​ POLITICO ​ POLITICO . While the Harris campaign has focused on increasing its visibility and solidifying its ground game, polling experts note that Trump remains within striking distance, especially in the critical “blue wall” states of the Rust Belt. The campaign is attempting to counteract this by bolstering outreach and ad spending targeted at Black and Latino voters, though Republicans have also made strategic inroads in these communities. Harris's plan to amplify her travel schedule in the final month of the campaign could help, but Democratic operatives caution that she must maintain a steady, proactive presence if she hopes to secure the voter bases that could make or break her candidacy in November​ POLITICO ​    [SEGMENT 1-3] Harris on internal polls 3 - James Carville I love watching these professional hucksters do their jobs. They are paid to LIE.   Kamala Harris did Shannon Sharpe and the interview got 32000 likes and 73000 dislikes. The interview is considered a disaster 11000 politicians and elites got exemptions from the COVID vax   James Carville knows Kamala Harris is in trouble. And I can only wonder how much money he got to write an article denoting 3 ways Harris will win:   https://x.com/joma_gc/status/1851245720835182873 Veteran Democrat strategist James Carville is telling campaign advisors and high-level donors behind the scenes that Kamala Harris is headed for a historic blowout, telling them she will lose every swing state and probably New Hampshire and Virginia too. https://news.meaww.com/james-carville-outlines-3-reasons-why-hes-certain-kamala-harris-will-win-2024-race   GOP's losing streak under Donald Trump James Carville's primary argument is rooted in the GOP's track record since Donald Trump's rise to power. He pointed to the Republican Party's series of electoral defeats, beginning in 2018 when Democrats secured the largest House majority in a midterm election since Watergate. He also noted Trump's 2020 loss to Joe Biden and the Republicans' underperformance in the 2022 midterms, which Carville attributed to voter backlash following the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization.  [SEGMENT 1-4] Harris on internal polls 4 - James Carville   [X] SB – Fox News on Axios report about Democrats losing Behind the curtain…Dems feel their blowing it.   "The biggest reason Mr Trump will lose is that the whole Republican Party has been on a losing streak since Mr Trump took it over," wrote Carville. He argued that the 78-year-old politician has not learned from his previous defeats nor built the broad coalition needed to win in 2024. Kamala Harris' fundraising edge and broad coalition James Carville, who was the mastermind behind Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential victory, pointed to Kamala Harris' significant fundraising advantage as a major factor in her potential victory. He noted that Harris' campaign raised nearly $360 million in September alone and has amassed more than $1 billion since she entered the race in July after President Biden stepped aside. "All this cash not only effectively offsets the flow of money funneling in for Mr Trump from some tech billionaires, but it has also given Ms Harris the resources she needs to persuade swing voters with ads and to organize on the ground," wrote Carville. He also highlighted Harris' diverse coalition, which includes progressive leaders like Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) to former GOP representatives Liz Cheney (Wyo) and Adam Kinzinger (Ill). The political consultant argued that this coalition, combined with a record voter turnout, could tip the scales in Harris' favor in the election. "This is shaping out to be a record-turnout election — and if the bigger coalition turns out with equal enthusiasm, it will be lights out for Mr Trump," Carville stated. "Harris will be elected the next president of the United States. Of this, I am certain," he shared. James Carville believes voters won't make 'same mistake twice' of electing Donald Trump In his final point, James Carville expressed his belief that the US is not as politically divided as it is often portrayed and that the American people will reject Donald Trump once again as he said, "A vast majority of Americans are rational, reasonable people of good will." "I refuse to believe that the same country that has time and again overcome its mistakes to bend its future toward justice will make the same mistake twice," he wrote. "America overcame Mr. Trump in 2020. I know that we know we are better than this," Carville concluded, according to The Hill. While Carville is confident in his prediction, he remains cautious, acknowledging the unpredictable nature of elections. During an appearance on CNN on Monday, October 21, he reiterated his belief that Harris will win but added, "I could be wrong."  Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-kevin-jackson-show--2896352/support.

[SEGMENT 1-1] Harris on internal polls 1   The Vegas betting line is 2-to-1 in favor of Trump. The people have spoken.   Kamala Harris would be nowhere without a crooked machine. That machine installed Biden, the surreptitiously disposed of him and replaced him with an even more worthless politician. I don't believe Biden actually thinks he won the 2020 election, but then again he is a braindead moron. So the idea that Kamala Harris believes the hype surrounding her campaign is equally incredulous. But in keeping with the bullsh*t that Democrats spin, when Kamala Harris was asked about her internal polls she lied. [X] SB – Kamala Harris on internal polling instincts   The same instincts that got her a healthy one percent of the Democrat vote when she ran in 2020? The reason why Harris didn't want to answer the question directly is because of her actual internal poll numbers. Harris is losing this election. And not by a couple of percentage points either. Harris is losing in two major ways. First, she's losing beyond the margin of error that pollsters so often mention. Second, she's losing beyond the margin of cheating.  http://getkrill.com/kevinjackson[SEGMENT 1-2] Harris on internal polls 2 You don't expect Harris or the Democrats to tell you the truth about the race, right? Use your common sense for just a bit, and ask yourself who America wants righting the ship: the person who demonstrated he could do it, while carrying the 800-lb gorilla of the Democrats and RINOs doing everything to could to subvert him and he was STILL SUCCESSFUL. OR Sista Girl who is so incompetent, Democrats know she would never have won a primary.     You simply can't have a voter revolt of this magnitude and think Harris can win. She's lost massive percentages in almost all major Democrat voting blocs.   Internal polling and recent media analyses reveal that the Harris-Walz campaign is experiencing mixed results and facing unique challenges in key battleground states. Despite a small lead over Trump in national polls, some reports suggest that enthusiasm among certain voter demographics, particularly younger and minority groups in states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Arizona, remains lukewarm. Campaign insiders and Democratic strategists are concerned that Harris's outreach hasn't fully tapped into these communities, leading to frustrations and accusations of a disorganized or lackluster state-level campaign approach. This disconnect has been particularly noticeable in Pennsylvania, where Democratic leaders have voiced concerns about Harris's campaign structure and outreach efforts, worrying that the campaign's underperformance may impact voter turnout in crucial areas like Philadelphia and Pittsburgh​ POLITICO ​ POLITICO . While the Harris campaign has focused on increasing its visibility and solidifying its ground game, polling experts note that Trump remains within striking distance, especially in the critical “blue wall” states of the Rust Belt. The campaign is attempting to counteract this by bolstering outreach and ad spending targeted at Black and Latino voters, though Republicans have also made strategic inroads in these communities. Harris's plan to amplify her travel schedule in the final month of the campaign could help, but Democratic operatives caution that she must maintain a steady, proactive presence if she hopes to secure the voter bases that could make or break her candidacy in November​ POLITICO ​    [SEGMENT 1-3] Harris on internal polls 3 - James Carville I love watching these professional hucksters do their jobs. They are paid to LIE.   Kamala Harris did Shannon Sharpe and the interview got 32000 likes and 73000 dislikes. The interview is considered a disaster 11000 politicians and elites got exemptions from the COVID vax   James Carville knows Kamala Harris is in trouble. And I can only wonder how much money he got to write an article denoting 3 ways Harris will win:   https://x.com/joma_gc/status/1851245720835182873 Veteran Democrat strategist James Carville is telling campaign advisors and high-level donors behind the scenes that Kamala Harris is headed for a historic blowout, telling them she will lose every swing state and probably New Hampshire and Virginia too. https://news.meaww.com/james-carville-outlines-3-reasons-why-hes-certain-kamala-harris-will-win-2024-race   GOP's losing streak under Donald Trump James Carville's primary argument is rooted in the GOP's track record since Donald Trump's rise to power. He pointed to the Republican Party's series of electoral defeats, beginning in 2018 when Democrats secured the largest House majority in a midterm election since Watergate. He also noted Trump's 2020 loss to Joe Biden and the Republicans' underperformance in the 2022 midterms, which Carville attributed to voter backlash following the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization.  [SEGMENT 1-4] Harris on internal polls 4 - James Carville   [X] SB – Fox News on Axios report about Democrats losing Behind the curtain…Dems feel their blowing it.   "The biggest reason Mr Trump will lose is that the whole Republican Party has been on a losing streak since Mr Trump took it over," wrote Carville. He argued that the 78-year-old politician has not learned from his previous defeats nor built the broad coalition needed to win in 2024. Kamala Harris' fundraising edge and broad coalition James Carville, who was the mastermind behind Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential victory, pointed to Kamala Harris' significant fundraising advantage as a major factor in her potential victory. He noted that Harris' campaign raised nearly $360 million in September alone and has amassed more than $1 billion since she entered the race in July after President Biden stepped aside. "All this cash not only effectively offsets the flow of money funneling in for Mr Trump from some tech billionaires, but it has also given Ms Harris the resources she needs to persuade swing voters with ads and to organize on the ground," wrote Carville. He also highlighted Harris' diverse coalition, which includes progressive leaders like Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) to former GOP representatives Liz Cheney (Wyo) and Adam Kinzinger (Ill). The political consultant argued that this coalition, combined with a record voter turnout, could tip the scales in Harris' favor in the election. "This is shaping out to be a record-turnout election — and if the bigger coalition turns out with equal enthusiasm, it will be lights out for Mr Trump," Carville stated. "Harris will be elected the next president of the United States. Of this, I am certain," he shared. James Carville believes voters won't make 'same mistake twice' of electing Donald Trump In his final point, James Carville expressed his belief that the US is not as politically divided as it is often portrayed and that the American people will reject Donald Trump once again as he said, "A vast majority of Americans are rational, reasonable people of good will." "I refuse to believe that the same country that has time and again overcome its mistakes to bend its future toward justice will make the same mistake twice," he wrote. "America overcame Mr. Trump in 2020. I know that we know we are better than this," Carville concluded, according to The Hill. While Carville is confident in his prediction, he remains cautious, acknowledging the unpredictable nature of elections. During an appearance on CNN on Monday, October 21, he reiterated his belief that Harris will win but added, "I could be wrong."Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-kevin-jackson-show--2896352/support.

On election day, Arizonans can vote to amend the state Constitution to establish the fundamental right to abortion. This amendment, which would undoubtedly increase access to abortion care, is especially salient given that Arizona has become an abortion access battleground state since the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. Alex Gomez, Executive Director of LUCHA – Living United for Change in Arizona, sits down to talk to us about Proposition 139 and what its possible passage may mean for the future of abortion in the state.  Proposition 139, the Right to Abortion Initiative, would enshrine abortion access into the state constitution and conclude that Arizona may not interfere with an individual's pregnancy before the point of fetal viability (the measure also protects access past fetal viability in cases of protecting the life, physical, or mental health of the pregnant person). In addition, the ballot initiative would prevent punitive laws aimed at people accessing abortion, or those assisting them. Support the showFollow Us on Social: Twitter: @rePROsFightBack Instagram: @reprosfbFacebook: rePROs Fight Back Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.comRate and Review on Apple PodcastThanks for listening & keep fighting back!

For 49 years, from 1973 until 2022, the Supreme Court declared that the US Constitution protected abortion rights. With this precedent overturned, decision making about reproductive rights now resides with state governments. But the court's 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization relied on a partial and inaccurate understanding of American history, and its claims to be a pro-democracy decision were disingenuous. Dobbs is just one example of the court smashing precedents in the last few years. Melissa Murray is the Frederick I. and Grace Stokes Professor of Law at New York University, where she specializes in family law, constitutional law, and reproductive rights and justice. She has written for a wide range of academic journals and popular publications and regularly provides legal commentary for several major media outlets. Her credits include the Harvard Law Review, the Yale Law Journal, the New York Times, Washington Post, and many others. She's a legal analyst at MSNBC and is also one of the cohosts of the podcast Strict Scrutiny, which focuses on the Supreme Court. https://crooked.com/podcast-series/strict-scrutiny/ https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250881397/thefallofroe

Reproductive healthcare remains a divisive issue in the United States, and once again, abortion is on the ballot in an election nearly one month away. In 2022, the Dobbs Decision took away the constitutional right to privacy and bodily autonomy and gave states increased rights to limit and even outlaw abortions. (Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Supreme Court Decision) The impact of this decision on women and girls resulted in forced births, preventable deaths, and legal prosecution for experiencing miscarriages and crossing state lines to seek necessary reproductive healthcare services. Due to the ever-present need for urgent response to these life-threatening and often life-ending policies, historical perspectives of women's reproductive healthcare may not always be at the forefront of the abortion debate. Today will learn from the life of a prominent 19th-century icon who offered reproductive healthcare services to women for forty years. Nicholas Syrett has written a brilliant portrayal of one of the most famous abortionists of this time in his book, “The Trials of Madame Restell: Nineteenth-Century America's Most Infamous Female Physician and the Campaign to Make Abortion a Crime” (The New Press 2023). Nicholas will share the profundity of her work amidst the scandals and consequences of the time. We will also discuss how this relates to the current state of women's reproductive rights.

AFP Podcast co-creator and editor Steven R. Brown, MD, speaks with Ali Block, MD, family physician, abortion provider, and host of the Nocturnists: Post-Roe America podcast series. Steve and Ali talk about abortion care in family medicine and changes since the 2022 Supreme Court Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision. Dr. Block shares ways in which reproductive health care has changed in different areas of the United States since the Dobbs decision, how her team created the Nocturnists: Post-Roe America podcast, her journey to communicate her own story, the culture of silence around abortion care, advocacy for abortion care, and ways in which the Dobbs decision affects medical education. The Nocturnists: Post-Roe America seven-part podcast series is available on the Nocturnists website or wherever you get your podcasts.

The U.S. Supreme Court's overruling of Roe v. Wade has rightfully triggered a national debate about the role of religion in lawmaking, women's rights to control their reproductive health, and the racially disparate impact of state prohibitions on abortion. Join our host Sahar Aziz and legal scholars Asifa Quraishi-Landes, and Cynthia Soohoo on the legal, political, and social implications of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Support the Center for Security, Race and Rights by following us and making a donation: Donate: https://give.rutgersfoundation.org/csrr-support/20046.html Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rucsrr Follow us on Instagram: https://instagram.com/rutgerscsrr Follow us on Facebook: https://facebook.com/rucsrr Follow us on TikTok: https://tiktok.com/rucsrr Subscribe to our Newsletter: https://csrr.rutgers.edu/newsroom/sign-up-for-newsletter/

On this episode of the Berkeley Technology Law Journal, we sat down with Professor Rebecca Wexler to discuss the intersection between reproductive justice and data privacy. In June 2022, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Dobbs overturned Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey's holdings that the US Constitution grants a right to an abortion. Shortly thereafter, Professor Wexler co-authored with Professor Aziz Huq an article in the New York University Law Review titled “Digital Privacy for Reproductive Choice in the Post-Roe Era. Today, Professor Wexler reflects on that piece and on the need for an evidentiary privilege to shield reproductive data from use in criminal investigations. We hope you enjoy the podcast. Record 3/08/2024.

Professor Greer Donley is a national expert on abortion and the law. Donley has published widely and been quoted extensively in the media, especially on topics related to medication abortion, interjurisdictional abortion conflicts, and the impact of abortion bans on other aspects of reproductive healthcare. Donley's scholarly works have been published in the Stanford Law Review, Columbia Law Review, Cornell Law Review, Vanderbilt Law Review, and Minnesota Law Review. Her popular writing often appears in the New York Times, the Atlantic, the Washington Post, and Slate. Her paper, The New Abortion Battleground, co-authored with David S. Cohen and Rachel Rebouché, was downloaded over 20,000 times, covered widely in the media, and cited by the Supreme Court's dissent in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Since the fall of Roe v. Wade, Professor Donley has regularly applied her expertise to advocacy work. Professor Donley helped design, draft, and pass the first abortion shield law in Connecticut, which has now been replicated in many states and cities. She also helped draft an FDA Law Scholars amicus brief in the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA case and was one of two primary drafters of a citizen petition to the FDA to add miscarriage management to the mifepristone label. Donley's scholarship, advocacy, and teaching have been recognized through a variety of awards, including a Chancellor's Distinguished Research Award (junior category), Marion Young Award for Political Engagement, Robert T. Harper Excellence in Teaching Award, Haub Law Emerging Scholar Award in Women, Gender & Law, and SLU & ASLME Health Law Scholar Award. In 2022, she was the 11th most downloaded law professor on SSRN.

In what has become a depressing tradition, it's time for our annual look at the hell that SCOTUS unleashed with Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. To look at the landscape for reproductive rights and justice, the team is joined by Julia Kaye, senior staff attorney at the ACLU and Fatima Goss Graves, president and CEO of the National Women's Law Center Action Fund.  Follow us on Instagram, Twitter, Threads, and Bluesky

In the wake of the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022), pro-choice advocates have argued that restrictions on abortion violate freedom of religion in some circumstances. A recent decision by the Indiana Court of Appeals, academic articles, and media stories have taken up these religious free-exercise challenges to abortion laws. […]

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), pro-choice advocates have argued that restrictions on abortion violate freedom of religion in some circumstances. A recent decision by the Indiana Court of Appeals, academic articles, and media stories have taken up these religious free-exercise challenges to abortion laws. This panel will explore the constitutional and statutory grounds for these claims in different faith traditions. pro-life responses to them, and the implications of these claims for religious liberty and for the post-Dobbs legal status of abortion.Featuring:Erin M. Hawley, Senior Counsel, Vice President of Center for Life & Regulatory Practice, Alliance Defending FreedomProf. Michael A. Helfand, Brenden Mann Foundation Chair and Co-Director of the Nootbaar Institute for Law, Pepperdine Caruso School of LawProf. Jessie Hill, Associate Dean and Professor of Law, Case Western Reserve University School of LawProf. Sherif Girgis, Associate Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School(Moderator) Prof. Michael Moreland, Professor of Law and Religion and Director of the Eleanor H. McCullen Center for Law, Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law

Following the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Biden administration filed a lawsuit in a federal district court in Idaho, arguing that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) preempts a state law that restricts abortion in all but limited circumstances. The district court sided with the Biden administration […]

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the Biden administration filed a lawsuit in a federal district court in Idaho, arguing that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) preempts a state law that restricts abortion in all but limited circumstances. The district court sided with the Biden administration and issued a preliminary injunction on Idaho’s law. On June 27th, 2024, the Supreme Court (6-3) dismissed the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted instead of determining the statutory interpretation question. It vacated its earlier stay of the district court’s preliminary injunction against Idaho’s abortion law.Join Erin Hawley, Senior Counsel and Vice President of the Center for Life & Regulatory Practice at Alliance Defending Freedom, for a breakdown of this decision and its implications on the legal issues surrounding abortion in the post-Roe era.Featuring:Erin M. Hawley, Senior Counsel, Vice President of Center for Life & Regulatory Practice, Alliance Defending Freedom

【聊了什么】 2022年6月，美国最高法院推翻了维持了半个世纪的联邦宪法保障女性堕胎权的里程碑式判决——罗诉韦德案（Roe v. Wade）。取而代之的是道布斯案（Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization），声称将堕胎权问题归还各州处理。这一决定引发了全国范围内的激烈争议，持续至今。 在本期播客中，我们将深入分析过去两年各州议会在堕胎权立法和司法审查上的激烈博弈，探讨堕胎权在全国范围内的可及性危机，回顾联邦法院在堕胎权相关议题上作出的若干重要判决，并展望堕胎权在即将到来的2024年大选中可能发挥的作用。 本期播客最初录制于5月19日，并在7月3日根据最高法院最新判决进行了补充录制。 【支持我们】 如果喜欢这期节目并希望支持我们将节目继续做下去： 欢迎加入我们最新推出的会员计划： https://theamericanroulette.com/paid-membership/ 众筹平台链接： Patreon https://www.patreon.com/americanroulette 爱发电 https://afdian.net/a/AmericanRoulette 合作投稿邮箱：american.roulette.pod@gmail.com 【时间轴】 00:02:45 堕胎问题的“州权”和“反扑” 00:04:09 各州的堕胎相关新立法 00:06:39 德州极端堕胎法造成医疗危机后民主党擦屁股 00:09:41 为何各州反堕胎立法漏洞频出 00:14:51 州最高法院引人瞩目的堕胎判决和后果 00:18:37 亚利桑那州高院反堕胎判决是如何起到反效果的 00:22:46 堕胎权公投和选举：“仁义不施而攻守之势异” 00:29:26 堕胎权在全国的可及性危机 00:35:38 联邦最高法院持续介入堕胎权问题 00:36:18 米非司酮案：保守派法官削弱行政部门 00:49:43 紧急堕胎医疗与“医生的良心” 00:56:33 古老的Comstock法案与今天的堕胎权 01:05:04 堕胎权被推翻会引发其他“隐私权”重审吗 01:14:06 美国和其他国家的堕胎权发展史大相径庭 01:21:39 特朗普摇摆不定的堕胎权立场 01:27:16 全国堕胎权禁令和堕胎权与大选的未来 01:36:16 高院在米非司酮案中支持FDA的前因后果 01:39:56 推翻“雪佛龙尊重”和堕胎权行政诉讼 01:47:56 高院未表态紧急堕胎医疗案中的实质问题 【我们是谁】 美轮美换是一档深入探讨当今美国政治的中文播客。 我们的主播和嘉宾： Lokin：美国法学院学生，即将成一名纽约诉讼律师 王皓岚：美国政治爱好者，岚目公众号主笔兼消息二道贩子 Talich：美国政治和文化历史爱好者 Nancy：普林斯顿大学政治学博士生，耶鲁法学院法律博士 【 What We Talked About】 In June of 2022, the United States Supreme Court overturned the milestone opinion that ensured women's right to abortion in the federal Constitution for half a century – Roe v. Wade. Instead, the Dobbs opinion proclaimed to return the issue of abortion to the states. For the past two years, controversies surrounding abortion rights have only grown louder nationwide. This episode of the podcast analyzes the interplay between state legislative enactments and judicial review on the issue of abortion rights over the past two years, the national accessibility crisis of abortion rights, several decisions produced by federal courts on abortion-related issues, and the potential role of abortion rights in the upcoming 2024 elections. This episode was initially recorded on May 19th and supplemented on July 3rd following the latest Supreme Court decisions. 【Support Us】 If you like our show and want to support us, please consider the following: Join our membership program: americanroulette.ghost.io Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/americanroulette Support us on AFDIAN: https://afdian.net/a/AmericanRoulette Business Inquiries and fan mail: american.roulette.pod@gmail.com 【Timeline】 00:02:45 “State rights” and “backlash” of the abortion question 00:04:09 New state legislations on abortion 00:06:39 Extreme abortion laws in Texas cause a medical crisis while Democrats try to save the day 00:09:41 Why are anti-abortion state laws full of loopholes 00:14:51 Eye-catching state supreme court abortion decisions and consequences 00:18:37 How the Arizona Supreme Court's anti-abortion decision backfired 00:22:46 Abortion right on the ballot and in the elections: “When benevolence and righteousness are not practiced, the balance of attack and defense shall alter.” 00:29:26 National accessibility crisis of abortion rights 00:35:38 Federal Supreme Court continues to weigh in on abortion rights 00:36:18 Mifepristone case: conservative justices weaken the administrative state 00:49:43 EMTALA, emergency abortion care, and “a doctor's conscience” 00:56:33 Ancient Comstock Act and today's abortion rights 01:05:04 Will overturning abortion rights lead to a retrial of other “privacy rights”? 01:16:06 American abortion rights as an international anti-trend 01:21:39 Swinging abortion position of Trump 01:27:16 National abortion ban, and the future of abortion rights and the elections 01:36:16 How the Supreme Court supported the FDA in the mifepristone case 01:39:56 Overturning “Chevron deference” and administrative litigation of abortion rights 01:47:56 Supreme Court failed to substantively rule on the EMTALA abortion case 【Who We Are】 The American Roulette is a podcast dedicated to helping the Chinese-speaking community understand fast-changing U.S. politics. Our Hosts and Guests: Lokin：American law student, New York litigator soon-to-be 王浩岚 (Haolan Wang): American political enthusiast, chief writer at Lán Mù WeChat Official Account, and peddler of information Talich：Aficionado of American politics, culture, and history Nancy：Princeton Politics PhD student, Yale Law School graduate 【拓展链接】 嘉宾推荐的论文： Roe Rage: Democratic Constitutionalism and Backlash https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/Faculty/Siegel_RoeRageDemocraticConstitutionalismAndBacklash.pdf 推翻雪佛龙尊重的高院重磅判决： Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/loper-bright-enterprises-v-raimondo/ 一氧化二氮（笑气）与氮氧化物（大气污染物）： This is why the Supreme Court shouldn't try to do the EPA's job https://newrepublic.com/article/183285/supreme-court-chevron-gorsuch-nitrous-oxide 保护堕胎权能帮到拜登么？ Abortion rights win big in 2023 elections. Can it help Biden win too? https://podcast.theamericanroulette.com/episodes/minimidterm

Reverend Jim Harden is president and CEO of CompassCare Pregnancy Services in New York. His own center was targeted by abortion terrorism.--Two years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court released their decision in the case known as Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. This reversed the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. You may recall that when the Dobbs decision was initially leaked, pro-life and pro-family agencies were targeted with firebombs and other forms of violence. One of those targeted was CompassCare Pregnancy Services in Buffalo, New York.--Reverend Harden clarified a very important point up front. He noted that the Dobbs decision did not make abortion illegal. It simply gave the states the right to regulate the procedures. It also galvanized pro-abortion extremists to their cause. The result was that at least 500 pro-life entities were attacked. There was also the weaponization of legislation whereby blue states passed legislation to regulate and-or outlaw certain aspects of pro-life pregnancy care work.--All of this points to the fact that the battle over life is intensifying. So as you review this broadcast you'll hear about the pro-abortion propaganda effort, the medical malpractice of the abortion industry and the death it's causing, the status of the firebombing incident at CompassCare in New York, the hoarding of Mifepristone by Democrat governors and so much more.

Reverend Jim Harden is president and CEO of CompassCare Pregnancy Services in New York. His own center was targeted by abortion terrorism.--Two years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court released their decision in the case known as Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. This reversed the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. You may recall that when the Dobbs decision was initially leaked, pro-life and pro-family agencies were targeted with firebombs and other forms of violence. One of those targeted was CompassCare Pregnancy Services in Buffalo, New York.--Reverend Harden clarified a very important point up front. He noted that the Dobbs decision did not make abortion illegal. It simply gave the states the right to regulate the procedures. It also galvanized pro-abortion extremists to their cause. The result was that at least 500 pro-life entities were attacked. There was also the weaponization of legislation whereby blue states passed legislation to regulate and-or outlaw certain aspects of pro-life pregnancy care work.--All of this points to the fact that the battle over life is intensifying. So as you review this broadcast you'll hear about the pro-abortion propaganda effort, the medical malpractice of the abortion industry and the death it's causing, the status of the firebombing incident at CompassCare in New York, the hoarding of Mifepristone by Democrat governors and so much more.

This is The Briefing, a daily analysis of news and events from a Christian worldview.Part I (00:13 - 14:58)How We Got Here: Re-Examining the History of Abortion in America Two Years Post-Dobbs, a Half-Century After RoeRoe v. Wade by The Supreme Court of the United StatesDobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization by The Supreme Court of the United StatesThe Untold Story of the Network That Took Down Roe v. Wade by The New York Times (Elizabeth Dias and Lisa Lerer)Part II (14:58 - 21:15)Dobbs Was Necessary But Not Sufficient: The Pro-Life Movement Faces a Huge Challenge in Our Current Cultural ClimatePart III (21:15 - 24:58)The Fight for Life Rages On: The Electoral and Political Battleground the Pro-Life Movement Faces on the 2 Year Anniversary of DobbsSign up to receive The Briefing in your inbox every weekday morning.Follow Dr. Mohler:X | Instagram | Facebook | YouTubeFor more information on The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, go to sbts.edu.For more information on Boyce College, just go to BoyceCollege.com.To write Dr. Mohler or submit a question for The Mailbox, go here.

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Erin Hawley discusses the two-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's overturning Roe v. Wade. The court's landmark ruling, Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health Organization, was a major pro-life victory. Hawley tells The Daily Signal about other court cases to watch and attacks on pro-life pregnancy centers and the unborn. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Erin Hawley discusses the two-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning Roe v. Wade. The court’s landmark ruling, Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, was a major pro-life victory. Hawley tells The Daily Signal about other court cases to watch and attacks on pro-life pregnancy centers and the unborn. […]

Reverend Jim Harden is president and CEO of CompassCare Pregnancy Services in New York. His own center was targeted by abortion terrorism.Two years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court released their decision in the case known as Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. This reversed the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. You may recall that when the Dobbs decision was initially leaked, pro-life and pro-family agencies were targeted with firebombs and other forms of violence. One of those targeted was CompassCare Pregnancy Services in Buffalo, New York.Reverend Harden clarified a very important point up front. He noted that the Dobbs decision did not make abortion illegal. It simply gave the states the right to regulate the procedures. It also galvanized pro-abortion extremists to their cause. The result was that at least 500 pro-life entities were attacked. There was also the weaponization of legislation whereby blue states passed legislation to regulate and/or outlaw certain aspects of pro-life pregnancy care work.All of this points to the fact that the battle over life is intensifying. So as you review this broadcast you'll hear about the pro-abortion propaganda effort, the medical malpractice of the abortion industry and the death it's causing, the status of the firebombing incident at CompassCare in New York, the hoarding of Mifepristone by Democrat governors and so much more.

Reverend Jim Harden is president and CEO of CompassCare Pregnancy Services in New York. His own center was targeted by abortion terrorism.--Two years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court released their decision in the case known as Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. This reversed the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. You may recall that when the Dobbs decision was initially leaked, pro-life and pro-family agencies were targeted with firebombs and other forms of violence. One of those targeted was CompassCare Pregnancy Services in Buffalo, New York.--Reverend Harden clarified a very important point up front. He noted that the Dobbs decision did not make abortion illegal. It simply gave the states the right to regulate the procedures. It also galvanized pro-abortion extremists to their cause. The result was that at least 500 pro-life entities were attacked. There was also the weaponization of legislation whereby blue states passed legislation to regulate and-or outlaw certain aspects of pro-life pregnancy care work.--All of this points to the fact that the battle over life is intensifying. So as you review this broadcast you'll hear about the pro-abortion propaganda effort, the medical malpractice of the abortion industry and the death it's causing, the status of the firebombing incident at CompassCare in New York, the hoarding of Mifepristone by Democrat governors and so much more.

Reverend Jim Harden is president and CEO of CompassCare Pregnancy Services in New York. His own center was targeted by abortion terrorism.--Two years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court released their decision in the case known as Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. This reversed the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. You may recall that when the Dobbs decision was initially leaked, pro-life and pro-family agencies were targeted with firebombs and other forms of violence. One of those targeted was CompassCare Pregnancy Services in Buffalo, New York.--Reverend Harden clarified a very important point up front. He noted that the Dobbs decision did not make abortion illegal. It simply gave the states the right to regulate the procedures. It also galvanized pro-abortion extremists to their cause. The result was that at least 500 pro-life entities were attacked. There was also the weaponization of legislation whereby blue states passed legislation to regulate and-or outlaw certain aspects of pro-life pregnancy care work.--All of this points to the fact that the battle over life is intensifying. So as you review this broadcast you'll hear about the pro-abortion propaganda effort, the medical malpractice of the abortion industry and the death it's causing, the status of the firebombing incident at CompassCare in New York, the hoarding of Mifepristone by Democrat governors and so much more.

Reverend Jim Harden is president and CEO of CompassCare Pregnancy Services in New York. His own center was targeted by abortion terrorism.Two years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court released their decision in the case known as Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. This reversed the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. You may recall that when the Dobbs decision was initially leaked, pro-life and pro-family agencies were targeted with firebombs and other forms of violence. One of those targeted was CompassCare Pregnancy Services in Buffalo, New York.Reverend Harden clarified a very important point up front. He noted that the Dobbs decision did not make abortion illegal. It simply gave the states the right to regulate the procedures. It also galvanized pro-abortion extremists to their cause. The result was that at least 500 pro-life entities were attacked. There was also the weaponization of legislation whereby blue states passed legislation to regulate and/or outlaw certain aspects of pro-life pregnancy care work.All of this points to the fact that the battle over life is intensifying. So as you review this broadcast you'll hear about the pro-abortion propaganda effort, the medical malpractice of the abortion industry and the death it's causing, the status of the firebombing incident at CompassCare in New York, the hoarding of Mifepristone by Democrat governors and so much more.

It has been nearly two years since the Supreme Court overturned the federal right to abortion, overturning Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Since then, several states have instituted their own abortion policies, including total bans on the procedure. We have also had several elections show to what extent reproductive rights affects political outcomes. Amanda Becker of The 19th News has chronicled these topics and more, particularly with her forthcoming book, “You Must Stand Up: The Fight for Abortion Rights in Post-Dobbs America,” and is here on Political Theater to discuss her work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It has been nearly two years since the Supreme Court overturned the federal right to abortion, overturning Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Since then, several states have instituted their own abortion policies, including total bans on the procedure. We have also had several elections show to what extent reproductive rights affects political outcomes. Amanda Becker of The 19th News has chronicled these topics and more, particularly with her forthcoming book, “You Must Stand Up: The Fight for Abortion Rights in Post-Dobbs America,” and is here on Political Theater to discuss her work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alison, Liz, and Rebecca are joined by reproductive rights expert, political strategist, and advocate Maya Rupert. They discuss how the fight for reproductive justice is being waged post-Dobbs and why the personal has never been more political.    Background When We Win with Maya Rupert Center For Reproductive Rights National Women's Law Center Explanation of EMTALA Joint amicus brief Episode 30 - The Mifepristone Case at SCOTUS Cases Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022) Moyle v. United States (2024)   Check us out on YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and X. Our website, we-dissent.org, has more information as well as episode transcripts.

In this episode of our occasional series, Postscript, we focus on the Supreme Court's recently published decisions in two cases, about guns and abortion, but more about how the Executive and Judicial branches of government function in the United States. Constitutional Law scholar (and New Books in Political Science co-host) Susan Liebell takes us through Garland v. Cargill, which focused on the Trump Administration's implementation of a prohibition against bump stocks for rifles following the deadly shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada in 2017. Liebell, a published expert on the Second Amendment and the long history of gun regulation in the United States, explains the thrust of the case, which is only tangentially connected to the Second Amendment, but calls into question the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearm's (ATF) expertise, particularly in context of the majority opinion's decision that the ATF was not using its administrative power correctly. The majority opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, may signal the Supreme Court's inclinations towards Chevron deference, which is also before the Court this term in the case of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. Liebell, also an expert on abortion access, reproductive health regulation, and citizenship, explains the Court's unanimous decision in Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. The opinion, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, focused solely on the question of standing, and whether the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine actually qualified to bring the case since there was no clear injury that had been sustained in the suit they brought before the District Court in Amarillo, Texas. Thus, the drug Mifepristone, which was to be banned nationwide in the initial court ruling by U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, was not banned as a result of this lawsuit brought by the Food and Drug Administration. This case, not dissimilar from Garland v. Cargill, focuses on procedural questions more than it focuses on other issues. And the unanimous decision is about that legal procedure, not about the FDA, or the process to through which drugs are brought to market in the United States, or about the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine's indictment of the process for prescribing mifepristone. Our conversation threads through these cases, and others (like Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and District of Columbia v. Heller) that set the foundation for these cases to come forward. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In this episode of our occasional series, Postscript, we focus on the Supreme Court's recently published decisions in two cases, about guns and abortion, but more about how the Executive and Judicial branches of government function in the United States. Constitutional Law scholar (and New Books in Political Science co-host) Susan Liebell takes us through Garland v. Cargill, which focused on the Trump Administration's implementation of a prohibition against bump stocks for rifles following the deadly shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada in 2017. Liebell, a published expert on the Second Amendment and the long history of gun regulation in the United States, explains the thrust of the case, which is only tangentially connected to the Second Amendment, but calls into question the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearm's (ATF) expertise, particularly in context of the majority opinion's decision that the ATF was not using its administrative power correctly. The majority opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, may signal the Supreme Court's inclinations towards Chevron deference, which is also before the Court this term in the case of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. Liebell, also an expert on abortion access, reproductive health regulation, and citizenship, explains the Court's unanimous decision in Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. The opinion, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, focused solely on the question of standing, and whether the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine actually qualified to bring the case since there was no clear injury that had been sustained in the suit they brought before the District Court in Amarillo, Texas. Thus, the drug Mifepristone, which was to be banned nationwide in the initial court ruling by U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, was not banned as a result of this lawsuit brought by the Food and Drug Administration. This case, not dissimilar from Garland v. Cargill, focuses on procedural questions more than it focuses on other issues. And the unanimous decision is about that legal procedure, not about the FDA, or the process to through which drugs are brought to market in the United States, or about the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine's indictment of the process for prescribing mifepristone. Our conversation threads through these cases, and others (like Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and District of Columbia v. Heller) that set the foundation for these cases to come forward. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Robert spoke with Professor Courtney Cahill about the recent Florida Supreme Court opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Florida. The court held that the Florida Constitution's privacy provision does not protect a woman's right to have an abortion. The U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization played a major role in the Florida Supreme Court's analysis. Professor Cahill is the Chancellor's Professor of Law and the University of California, Irvine School of Law. Professor Cahill is a scholar of constitutional law, anti-discrimination law, sex equality, and LGBTQ equality. Her forthcoming projects include a series of essays on constitutional sex equality—including the constitutional sex equality argument for abortion. She is also working on a new book called Busted, which will explore the vast network of laws that subject girls and women to criminal penalties for going topless in public and sometimes in the home. Thank you for listening. Please share the podcast with your friends and colleagues, and rate and review the show.Summarily is sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Click the BetterHelp link (BetterHelp.com/Summarily) for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast's advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast's creator is prohibited.

Since Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, state courts and legislatures have grappled with its legal and policy implications, especially as they pertain to abortion and IVF. In LePage v. Center for Reproductive Medicine, for example, the Alabama Supreme Court held that frozen embryos should be regarded as “children” for the purposes of Alabama's Wrongful […]

Since Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, state courts and legislatures have grappled with its legal and policy implications, especially as they pertain to abortion and IVF. In LePage v. Center for Reproductive Medicine, for example, the Alabama Supreme Court held that frozen embryos should be regarded as “children” for the purposes of Alabama’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act. And in Planned Parenthood v. Mayes, the Arizona Supreme Court upheld an 1864 law that bans all abortions in the state except those deemed necessary to save the life of the mother.These recent rulings have been highly criticized by commentators on both sides of the aisle, and they raise important questions about the legal status of IVF and abortion in the wake of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. For example, in both cases, the courts interpreted the law in accordance with textualist principles, and the state legislatures swiftly enacted measures to address the state supreme court decisions afterward. Are these cases therefore examples of the proper allocation of powers, where the judiciary says what the law is, and the legislature is tasked with implementing policy? With the question of abortion being returned to the legislative process post-Dobbs, do these cases invite more thoughtful dialogue about abortion and IVF policy, or do they sow further acrimony? Were these cases rightly decided? Can we articulate a legal standard vis-à-vis abortion and IVF that is both thoughtful and conceptually consistent? In what ways do abortion and IVF interact, both philosophically and legally? Please join us as we discuss these issues and others with some of the leading scholars in this space.Featuring:Prof. I. Glenn Cohen, James A. Attwood and Leslie Williams Professor of Law & Deputy Dean; Faculty Director, Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology & Bioethics; Harvard University Law SchoolProf. O. Carter Snead, Director, de Nicola Center for Ethics and Culture and Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School(Moderator) Jennie Bradley Lichter, Deputy General Counsel, The Catholic University of America

No Rahimi decision yet … but Sarah and David have the next best thing: math! The two dive into Sarah's recent POLITICO piece in which she and Dean Jens used data to analyze the Supreme Court. The Agenda: —The three-body problem —Was Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization radical? —Moneyballing the court —“Right to counsel” at the 9th Circuit —Racial discrimination in contracting —Test cases are test cases —Judge Newsom's “unusual” concurrence —Judge Easterbrook on fonts —The health of the Constitution Show Notes: —Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum —Connelly v. United States —Becerra v. San Carlos Apache Tribe —National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo —Allen v. Milligan —New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen —Creative LLC v. Elenis —Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission —Chief Justice John Roberts' thoughts on AI —Pacific Legal Foundation Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including Sarah's Collision newsletter, weekly livestreams, and other members-only content—click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Originalism is the ascendant legal theory espoused by conservative legal thinkers, including the majority of U.S. Supreme Court justices. But far from being an objective framework for constitutional interpretation, says author and attorney Madiba Dennie, its true purpose is to achieve conservative political aims regardless of the historical record.  In The Originalism Trap: How Extremists Stole the Constitution and How We the People Can Take It Back, Dennie traces the roots of originalism as a legal theory back to Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, though the Supreme Court rejected the arguments in the 1954 case. Its adherents argue the meaning of the Constitution must solely be determined by “the original public meaning of the Constitution at the time it was drafted,” and that there is a discernible correct answer to what that meaning would have been. The theory gained popularity in the 1980s, with the late Robert Bork and Justice Antonin Scalia as two influential proponents. Scalia famously said the Constitution is “not a living document. It's dead, dead, dead.” Today, originalism has formed the basis for decisions such as Justice Samuel Alito's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization opinion overturning Roe v. Wade. “Despite originalism's reputation as a serious intellectual theory, it's more like dream logic: It seems reasonable at first, but when you wake up, you can recognize it as nonsense,” Dennie writes. “Originalism deliberately overemphasizes a particular version of history that treats the civil-rights gains won over time as categorically suspect. The consequences of its embrace have been intentionally catastrophic for practically anyone who isn't a wealthy white man, aka the class of people with exclusive possession of political power at the time the Constitution's drafters originally put pen to paper (or quill to parchment).” In this episode of The Modern Law Library, Dennie and the ABA Journal's Lee Rawles discuss how conservative originalists prioritize the time period of the Founding Fathers over the Reconstruction Era that produced the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. “We can't fulfill the Reconstruction Amendments' radical vision of full equality and freedom if we can't be attentive to the ways in which we have been made unequal and unfree,” Dennie writes in The Originalism Trap. While Dennie believes there are portions of the historical record that support broad civil liberty protections, she says she does not think originalism is a useful tool for progressives to use as a legal framework.  In place of originalism, Dennie has a bold proposal: inclusive constitutionalism. “Inclusive constitutionalism means what it says: the Constitution includes everyone, so our legal interpretation must serve to make the promise of inclusive democracy real. When the judiciary is called upon to resolve a legal ambiguity or when there are broad principles at issue, the application of which must be made specific, it is proper for courts to consider how cases may relate to systemic injustices and how different legal analyses would impact marginalized people's ability to participate in the country's political, economic and social life.”  Rawles and Dennie also discuss how lawyers and judges can push back against originalism; the legal rights and protections achieved by groups like Jehovah's Witnesses and the LGBTQ+ community; why she dropped Jurassic Park references into the book; and how she keeps an optimistic outlook on the expansion of civil liberties. “Justice for all may not be a deeply rooted tradition,” Dennie writes, “but fighting for it is.”

When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, it scrambled the landscape of abortion access in America, including in ways that one might not entirely expect. Many conservative states made the procedure essentially illegal — that part was predictable. But there's also been this striking backlash in blue states, with many of them making historic efforts to expand abortion access, for both their residents and for women living in abortion-restricted states.And this has created all kinds of new battle lines — between states, and states and the federal government — involving travel, speech, privacy and executive power. It's an explosion of conflicts and constitutional questions that the legal historian Mary Ziegler says has no parallel in modern times. She's the author of six books on reproductive rights in America, including “Roe: The History of a National Obsession,” and the Martin Luther King Jr. professor of law at the University of California, Davis. “We're seeing, from conservative and progressive states, moves to project power outside of their borders in ways we really haven't seen in a really long time,” she told me.In this conversation, Ziegler explains the bifurcated abortion landscape that has emerged since the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturned Roe. We discuss the different political and legal strategies conservative and progressive states are using to pursue their opposing goals; why the abortion rate has gone up, even as 14 states have implemented near-total bans on abortion; and how a second Trump administration could try to restrict access to abortion for all Americans, no matter what states they live in.Mentioned:“Harsh Anti-abortion Laws Are Not Empty Threats” by Mary ZieglerBook Recommendations:The Family Roe by Joshua PragerTiny You by Jennifer L. HollandDefenders of the Unborn by Daniel K. Williams“Before Roe v. Wade” by Linda Greenhouse and Reva B. SiegelThoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com.You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast. Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs.This episode of “The Ezra Klein Show” was produced by Claire Gordon and Kristin Lin. Fact-checking by Michelle Harris, with Mary Marge Locker and Kate Sinclair. Our senior engineer is Jeff Geld, with additional mixing from Efim Shapiro. The show's production team also includes Annie Galvin and Rollin Hu. Original music by Isaac Jones. Audience strategy by Kristina Samulewski and Shannon Busta. The executive producer of New York Times Opinion Audio is Annie-Rose Strasser. Special thanks to Sonia Herrero.

Expectant mothers in Mississippi now can access resources to receive essentials, from food and clothing to child care and financial assistance, through a mobile app dubbed MAMA. Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch on Tuesday unveiled the Mississippi Access to Maternal Assistance mobile app, or MAMA, to connect moms easily with the resources they need to care for their children. Mothers or pregnant women now can "find not only the public resources that are available but private resources and faith-based resources, all in one place," Fitch says of the new tool. "And that is so significant for young mothers to be able to find things that they need, questions they might have, all together."Fitch led the way on the legal case out of Mississippi called Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which ultimately led the Supreme Court in June 2022 to overturn its 1973 decision on abortion in Roe v. Wade. A year and a half later, Fitch says, the pro-life movement is working hard to provide women with easy access to what they need to choose life for their children. "Remember, we asked the court to give the responsibilities to us," Fitch says of arguments made to the Supreme Court in the Dobbs case. "So we're now embracing that. It is so important that we talk about it, we take action, we implement things that are important for these young mothers, mothers-to-be, and these children."Fitch joins this episode of “The Daily Signal Podcast” to discuss how the MAMA mobile app can serve as a model tool for other states, as well as to celebrate the 51st annual March for Life, which takies place Friday in Washington, D.C. Enjoy the show! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since long before Roe v Wade enshrined a federal right to choose in 1973, abortion has been one of the most contentious issues in American life. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe with their decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, marking  a new peak in the political energy and emotion surrounding abortion. Katie's guest today, New York Times journalist Jodi Kantor (who won a Pulitzer for her Me Too reporting), has been behind some of the most exhaustively sourced and in-depth reporting on just how Dobbs unfolded.    As Jodi tells us, in many ways, SCOTUS' Dobb's decision was shocking. The case started as a long-shot ban on abortions after 15-weeks in Mississippi. But a series of events made it one of the most monumental in American history: an even more controversial case from Texas coming along at the same time, Justice Ginsberg's death, and an unprecedented leak of the decision in Dobbs that some feel affected Justices' ability to deliberate fully. It's easy to imagine this going differently if even one of those things changed.   Roe's reversal could be interpreted as the triumphant fruition of 50 years of conservative efforts or as an issue that could swing voters to liberal candidates; there's evidence for both. Entering an election year, the transparency Jodi brings to one of our most hallowed institutions–one that may face serious tests this year–is unmissable.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.