Reproductive Justice Litigation
Amicus Curiae Representation
The Women’s Law Project has participated in numerous high-profile cases by representing amici curiae.
- In a nationwide effort, the WLP led an amicus brief campaign in Gonzales v. Carhart (2007), mobilizing diverse organizations in support of women’s right to choose the safest and most medically appropriate abortion procedure. In a 5-4 ruling, the Court upheld the first-ever federal ban on abortion procedures. In so doing, the Court subordinated women’s health to government paternalism. More information is available here.
- In 2005, WLP attorneys provided amicus support for Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. The case challenged a parental notification law in New Hampshire that did not include a provision allowing medical providers to perform an emergency abortion for a minor without obtaining permission from a judge. In conjunction with Howrey, LLP in Washington, DC, the WLP filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court on behalf of nine groups committed to preserving minors’ access to reproductive health services in emergency medical situations.
- In October 2004, the WLP filed an amicus brief in support of Planned Parenthood of Alaska’s challenge to the Alaska’s judicial bypass law in Alaska v. Planned Parenthood of Alaska. The brief described the enormous burden the judicial bypass procedure would impose upon young women in Alaska who seek an abortion.
- In Stenberg v. Carhart (2002), the WLP submitted an amicus brief on behalf of 75 organizations committed to women’s equality. In a victory for women, the Supreme Court ultimately decided that the Nebraska law banning a specific abortion procedure was unconstitutional.
|
