SIGN UP FOR JOBS NEWS & ALERTS:
print Print    Share Share  
Weekly Email Weekly News Email RSS Feed News RSS

Feminist News

Search Feminist News by keyword

Search News and/or 

first record   previous record  News Stories 26 to 50 of 13862  next record   last record


9/2/2014 - California Legislators Pass Affirmative Consent Bill to Combat Campus Sexual Assault

California legislators passed a bill last week that would require state colleges and universities to adopt a standard of unambiguous, affirmative consent for students who engage in sexual activity.

SB 967 is the first of its kind. It defines affirmative consent as: "Affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity." Affirmative consent does not include silence, lack of resistance, or "consent" given while intoxicated, and the consent has to be continually given throughout the sexual activity and can be revoked at any time. All people involved in the sexual activity must ensure that they have the affirmative consent of others.

The bill will radically change the current standard of proving sexual assault, which requires victims of sexual assault to demonstrate that they did not consent.

"Rape culture dictates that along with proving that they were raped, survivors must also prove that they fought 'hard enough' to stop it," Autostraddle reports. "Not saying 'no' or not physically fighting someone off is understood to mean 'yes'... By not accepting silence as consent, California's affirmative consent bill nudges colleges away from rape culture and provides protection for marginalized groups."

The bill, authored by Senator Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles) and Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), will also require schools to implement a comprehensive prevention program and will help victims of sexual assault access medical care, legal assistance, counseling and other services. It now goes to Governor Jerry Brown for his signature.

The Department of Education reported in May that 55 schools across the United States are currently under investigation for their handling of sexual assault claims. Many legislators and the White House have been looking for ways to reduce campus sexual assault and hold college and universities more accountable. Just this past July, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Congresswoman Susan Davis (D-CA-49) introduced the Survivor Outreach and Support Campus Act (S.O.S. Campus Act), which would require colleges and universities to designate an independent advocate to support survivors of sexual assault. Senator Boxer is now pushing California colleges and universities to voluntarily implement her proposed federal legislation.


9/2/2014 - Federal Courts Block TRAP Laws in Texas and Louisiana

The Labor Day weekend marked two major victories in the battle for reproductive justice in Texas and Louisiana.

On Friday, U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel blocked two provisions of Texas's omnibus anti-abortion law HB 2. In a scathing 21-page opinion, Judge Yeakel wrote that the law's requirement that abortion clinics meet the same building requirements as ambulatory surgical centers (ASC) created an "unconstitutional undue burden on women throughout Texas" and could not stand. Judge Yeakel also found that the law's admitting privileges requirement was unconstitutional as applied to two clinics in McAllen, located in the Rio Grande Valley, and El Paso.

This is the second time that Judge Yeakel has ruled against the admitting privileges requirement. The first case challenged the admitting privileges requirement as it applied to all clinics in the state - not just to the Rio Grande and El Paso clinics. Judge Yeakel struck down the requirement last year, but a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit upheld the law. The plaintiffs in that case have asked the full appeals court to rehear the case.

HB 2 has already led to the closure of about half of Texas's 20 abortion clinics. Had the ASC requirement gone into effect, as planned, on September 1, most of the state's remaining clinics would have been forced to close leaving no more than eight facilities.

"That the State suggests that these seven or eight providers could meet the demand of the entire state stretches credulity," Judge Yeakel wrote. "The ambulatory surgical requirement, combined with the already in-effect admitting-privileges requirement, creates a brutally effective system of abortion regulation that reduces access to abortion clinics thereby creating a statewide burden for substantial numbers of Texas women. The obstacles created for these women are more significant than the 'incidental effect of making it more difficult or more expensive to procure an abortion."

Judge Yeakel detailed that the burden created by the law could not be reduced merely to increased travel distances to the state's remaining clinics. Instead, he viewed clinic closures in a broader context, writing that "increased travel distances combine with practical concerns unique to every woman." He continued, "These practical concerns include lack of availability of child care, unreliability of transportation, unavailability of appointments at abortion facilities, unavailability of time off from work, immigration status and inability to pass border checkpoints, poverty level, the time and expense involved in traveling long distances," as well as other challenges. He concluded that "the clinics' closure statewide would operate for a significant number of women in Texas just as drastically as a complete ban on abortion."

Judge Yeakel said that the evidence presented by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott to substantiate the need for an ASC requirement in emergency situations were weak in the face of opposing evidence that such complications are exceedingly rare in Texas, nationwide, and specifically with respect to the Plaintiff abortion providers.

Following the ruling, Whole Woman's Health, one of the Plaintiffs in the case, issued a statement that its clinic in McAllen, which has been shutdown in March, had reopened as a result of Judge Yeakel's ruling. The statement also noted that Whole Woman's Health of Fort Worth and Whole Woman's Health of San Antonio would stay open now that the ASC requirement had been struck down.

This victory at the district court level still remains uncertain, however.Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has already filed an emergency appeal of Judge Yeakel's decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Read the Feminist Majority Foundation's response to Friday's decision in Texas here.

On the heels of the Texas decision, Federal District Court Judge John W. deGravelles on Sunday granted abortion providers temporary relief from Louisiana state law HB 388, which requires doctors performing abortions to obtain admitting privileges at local hospitals. The Center for Reproductive Rights is challenging HB 388 on behalf of Louisiana's five clinics. Judge deGravelles's decision means that the law cannot be enforced pending the final outcome of the case.

The clinics argue that doctors have not had enough time to comply with the law, which took effect September 1. Signed earlier this year, HB 388, only allowed doctors 81 days to initiate a request for admitting privileges - a process that is highly subjective, and can extend for an indefinite amount of time. Had Judge deGravelles failed to block enforcement of the law, at least three of Louisiana's five clinics would have been forced to stop providing abortion services.

If the Louisiana decision is appealed, it will also be heard in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the same appeals court that upheld Texas's admitting privileges as applied to all clinics in the state. This summer, however, a panel of the Fifth Circuit refused to strike down a preliminary injunction against enforcement of HB 1390, the Mississippi law requiring abortion providers to obtain admitting privileges at area hospitals. That decision allowed Mississippi's only remaining clinic, Jackson Women's Health Organization (JWHO), to remain open. Also this summer, a federal district court judge in Alabama ruled that that state's admitting privileges requirement was unconstitutional. Alabama is not within the jurisdiction of the Fifth Circuit.


8/29/2014 - Domestic Violence Victims May Now Qualify For Asylum in the US

A recent case has opened the door for victims of domestic violence abroad to qualify for asylum in the United States.

The Justice Department's Board of Immigration Appeals ruled for the first time on Tuesday that a victim of domestic violence fit a specific criterion for asylum: persecution for membership in a particular social group. In this case, the group is married Guatemalan women who cannot leave their relationships. The woman who brought the case fled her abusive husband in Guatemala. She frequently sought help from police in Guatemala, but they told her they would not interfere with her marriage. She argued that her experiences with abuse and the negligent police response should make her eligible for asylum. Guatemala is ranked third in the world for the murder of women.

Those seeking asylum must demonstrate that they will be persecuted in their home country because of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group. The decision to include the woman's experience as a criterion only affects Guatemalan women at the moment, but it opens the door for cases for people from other countries.

"The decision for this Guatemalan woman has clear implications for other Central American women, that's for sure," Benjamin Casper, the director of Center for New Americans at the University of Minnesota Law School, told the Associated Press. "This is the first binding decision . . . to recognize this social group of women."

The woman has not won asylum yet, but it is expected that she ultimately will. The Homeland Security Department did not contest the case, and an immigration judge must now give a final ruling.


8/29/2014 - Terry O'Neill Was One of Hundreds Arrested Calling for Immigration Reform at White House Rally

Thursday, nearly 300 people were arrested in front of the White House during a rally calling on President Barack Obama to halt mass deportations. Among them was Terry O'Neill, President of the National Organization for Women (NOW).

O'Neill was arrested during El Dia Decisivo, a civil disobedience action led by Casa de Maryland and the newly formed Casa de Virginia. She spoke to the Feminist Newswire just hours after being released from custody.

"NOW, for a very long time, has been engaged with allies in the fight for immigrant women's rights," O'Neill said. "NOW has long taken the position that unless you simultaneously end sexism, racism, homophobia and all the -isms that are out there, we can't achieve true equality," she said. As part of the We Belong Together Coalition: Women for Common Sense Immigration Reform , the group supported the Senate's action to reform US immigration laws last year, but O'Neill said there are still "huge problems."

"Most women who come [into the United States] come as family members of men who have visas," she said. O'Neill called attention to the particular nest of bureaucracy facing immigrant women. "She may be a brilliant scientist, but she can't even look for work," O'Neill said. The employment-based visa holder can claim certain family members as dependents, but depending on the terms of the employment or family-based visa, those family members cannot seek employment in the United States. The Immigration Policy Center says family visas can "facilitate" women's labor force participation, but they certainly do not guarantee such participation. "In the meantime, her (skills) are atrophying. She's losing her ability to use her skills and talents while she's waiting around for her paperwork to be processed," O'Neill said. "We need to divert those resources from deportation to providing services."

Advocates for comprehensive immigration reform have criticized the present Congress for its failure to prevent families from being torn apart by deportation, but O'Neill also called attention to the impact of laws that put single immigrant women at a disadvantage. "Look, not every married couple that comes into this country is going to stay married," she told the Newswire, adding that individuals who depend on their spouse's visa face the greatest vulnerability if and when the relationship changes. "Where's she going to get her economic security? If the relationship is or becomes violent, the woman is extremely vulnerable."

Advocates fought to expand the number of "U Visas" available to victims of crimes like trafficking or domestic violence, but O'Neill said there still aren't enough. The aggressive coordination of local law enforcement with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers also discourages immigrant women from coming forward if they are subjected to violence.

"If (victims of a crime) live in a community that's largely undocumented, women will be hesitant to bring it to the authorities," O'Neill said. "Because of the way ICE behaves, because of their insistence on scooping up large numbers of people because their only crime is that their papers aren't in order - as long as ICE is behaving that way, that makes it harder for immigrant women to come forward." O'Neill said this is true with or without legal status.

According to Wednesday's Washington Post, the White House announced plans to take executive action on immigration in the coming weeks. "We want President Obama to go big," O'Neill said. "He said he's going to do something. We want him to do a lot. Stop all of the mass deportation. Stop separating those families."


8/29/2014 - Fifth Circuit Blocks Texas TRAP Law Provision!

WASHINGTON - The Feminist Majority Foundation applauds U.S. District Court Judge Lee Yeakel's decision Friday striking down parts of a Texas anti-abortion law.

The court deemed unconstitutional a provision of House Bill 2 that would have required Texas abortion clinics to meet the stringent building code requirements of ambulatory surgical centers - a provision that would have caused most of the state's remaining clinics to close.

"A woman's constitutionally-protected right to seek out a safe and legal abortion should not hinge on the width of a doorway," said Feminist Majority Foundation President Eleanor Smeal. "Access to abortion and birth control is under attack across the nation. No other outpatient service has been made to adhere to these medically unnecessarily and harmful requirements. We will not rest until women's access to constitutionally-protected reproductive services are available to all women. These TRAP laws, if allowed to go into effect, will surely cost some women their lives."

"We are pleased Judge Yeakel once again recognized this law for what it is - an unconstitutional burden on the rights of women and abortion providers in Texas," said duVergne Gaines, director of the Feminist Majority Foundation's National Clinic Access Project.

"We commend abortion Texas providers like Amy Hagstrom Miller for continuing to fight against these relentless, unconscionable and unconstitutional attacks. Women's lives are on the political cutting board."

Today, Judge Yeakel rightly acknowledged the "undue burden" the requirements would have placed on the shoulders of women seeking safe and legal abortion services in Texas. In just over a year, HB 2 has effectively reduced the number of abortion clinics in the state from 41 to barely more than a dozen. Across the nation, TRAP (Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers) laws like HB 2 are undermining women's access to truly comprehensive reproductive health care.

The first stages of HB 2 went into effect in November 2013 and severely restricted women's access to abortion. The bill currently prohibits abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, requires doctors to obtain hospital-admitting privileges and, as of September 1, would have required abortion clinics to spend millions of dollars in unnecessary renovations to meet the surgical center requirements.


8/29/2014 - BREAKING: Fifth Circuit Blocks Texas TRAP Law Provision!

WASHINGTON - The Feminist Majority Foundation applauds U.S. District Court Judge Lee Yeakel's decision Friday striking down parts of a Texas anti-abortion law.

The court deemed unconstitutional a provision of House Bill 2 that would have required Texas abortion clinics to meet the stringent building code requirements of ambulatory surgical centers - a provision that would have caused most of the state's remaining clinics to close.

"A woman's constitutionally-protected right to seek out a safe and legal abortion should not hinge on the width of a doorway," said Feminist Majority Foundation President Eleanor Smeal. "Access to abortion and birth control is under attack across the nation. No other outpatient service has been made to adhere to these medically unnecessarily and harmful requirements. We will not rest until women's access to constitutionally-protected reproductive services are available to all women. These TRAP laws, if allowed to go into effect, will surely cost some women their lives."

"We are pleased Judge Yeakel once again recognized this law for what it is - an unconstitutional burden on the rights of women and abortion providers in Texas," said duVergne Gaines, director of the Feminist Majority Foundation's National Clinic Access Project.

"We commend abortion Texas providers like Amy Hagstrom Miller for continuing to fight against these relentless, unconscionable and unconstitutional attacks. Women's lives are on the political cutting board."

Today, Judge Yeakel rightly acknowledged the "undue burden" the requirements would have placed on the shoulders of women seeking safe and legal abortion services in Texas. In just over a year, HB 2 has effectively reduced the number of abortion clinics in the state from 41 to barely more than a dozen. Across the nation, TRAP (Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers) laws like HB 2 are undermining women's access to truly comprehensive reproductive health care.

The first stages of HB 2 went into effect in November 2013 and severely restricted women's access to abortion. The bill currently prohibits abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, requires doctors to obtain hospital-admitting privileges and, as of September 1, would have required abortion clinics to spend millions of dollars in unnecessary renovations to meet the surgical center requirements.

###



 ###


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 29, 2014
J.T. Johnson: (office) 703-522-2214 | (cell) 202-681-7251 | jjohnson@feminist.org


8/28/2014 - New California Law Takes Military Sexual Assault Cases Out of the Chain of Command

Last Thursday, California Governor Jerry Brown (D) signed into law a bill that would take military sexual assault cases out of military purview and instead assign them to civilian prosecutors in the state. The law also now requires the California Military Department to report annually to the state government on sexual assault incidences and prevention plans.

Prior to the passage of SB 1422, all investigation and prosecution of military sexual assault cases was done within the military chain of command and by military lawyers. Under the new legislation, only cases in which a civilian prosecutor refuses to see a case would involve military personnel.

Last year, the Pentagon released a report that revealed epidemic levels of sexual assault in the military, as well as a culture of silence in which victims rarely came forward to report the crimes. Although 26,000 men and women were sexually assaulted in the military in 2012 alone, the report found that just 3,374 cases were reported. This year, the Pentagon identified a 50 percent increase in reported cases, but only 10 percent went to trial. Advocates have urged military sexual assault cases be prosecuted outside ofthe chain-of-command to reduce retaliation against victims and increase reporting.

Since 2013, there has been a growing effort to curb sexual assault in the military, led largely by women in the Senate. In March, the Senate blocked the Military Justice Improvement Act, which would have removed all military sexual assault cases from the chain-of-command on a national level. Later that month, the Senate passed legislation eliminating the "good soldier defense" for accused perpetrators.

Sexual assault is a serious problem throughout our military," California State Senator Alex Padilla (D-Pacoima) said in a statement. "While Washington debates how to address this crisis, California can lead by example. Victims of sexual assault deserve our support and a respectful and effective justice system.

President Obama, who signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act of 2014 to prevent military sexual assault and strengthen protections for survivors, called for a review of the military's progress to end the epidemic last December that should take place later this year.


8/28/2014 - Illinois Expands Medicaid Funding for Contraception in Wake of Hobby Lobby

The Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services has announced plans to expand Medicaid funding for contraception, effective October 1.

The Illinois Family Planning Action Plan would increase the amount of money set aside for health care organizations providing reproductive health care. It would double Medicaid reimbursement rates for vasectomies and IUDs (intrauterine devices). The plan also includes an accommodation for religiously-affiliated providers who may object to providing contraceptives. Under the proposal, patients not covered by their employer and receiving Medicaid will be referred to providers that offer contraceptive care.

Julie Hamos, the director of the state Department of Healthcare and Family Services, said the Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision had a direct impact on the new proposal. Hamos said the Supreme Court ruling was of "extreme concern" to Governor Pat Quinn. Of the 3 million Illinois residents enrolled in Medicaid, a third are women of childbearing age. Unplanned pregnancies are a major expense for that population, which, Hamos said, is expected to grow under the Affordable Care Act.

"Providers need to make family planning accessible," Hamos told attendees at the Illinois Contraceptive Equity Summit last week. Nearly 100 doctors, nurses, social workers and members of the women's health community attended the summit.

The public is welcome to comments on the new proposal until September 15th.


8/28/2014 - Senator Boxer Pushes for Sexual Assault Victim Advocates at California Universities

Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) urged California universities to create independent sexual assault victim's advocates on their campuses in a letter sent out on Tuesday.

"As our students return to campus, they are counting on their universities to not only educate them, but also to protect them," Senator Boxer wrote in the letter to university presidents and leaders. "Yet, as you know too well, campus sexual assault has reached epidemic levels in our country, and I am writing to ask you to create an independent victim's advocate on your campuses."

Boxer is urging the schools to voluntarily implement the provisions of the Survivor Outreach and Support Campus Act (SOS Campus Act), which she introduced with Congresswoman Susan Davis (D-San Diego) last month. If passed, the act will require federally-funded institutions of higher education to create an independent campus advocate who will work on prevention and response of campus sexual assault. Specifically, the advocate would conduct public information campaigns about sexual assault on campus as well as ensure survivors have access to medical care and forensic exams, crisis intervention and counseling, guidance on reporting assaults and information on their legal rights.

One in five women in the US will experience a rape or attempted rape at some point during her years in college, but many universities have mishandled sexual assault cases and are now facing federal investigations. In response, legislation has been introduced to hold universities accountable, and the White House convened a task force on campus sexual assault.

Take Action: Bring the Campaign to End Campus Sexual Violence to your campus!


8/28/2014 - New Report Urges US Military to Allow Transgender Personnel to Serve Openly

A recent report concluded that the US military has the resources it needs to allow transgender personnel to serve openly. Unfortunately, military policies don't allow them to do so.

The study, conducted by Palm Center, found that 15,000 transgender personnel currently serve in US armed forces, although standards dictate that they don't do so openly. Researchers found that it is feasible for the US military to form and implement a more inclusive policy for transgender personnel, therefore joining 18 countries around the world that allow transgender individuals to openly serve. The report also recommended that transition-related surgery be "regarded no differently from any other surgery."

"The decision to allow transgender personnel to serve in the military reflects the core values and principles that all military personnel should serve with honor and integrity," the survey concluded, "and the military should not needlessly separate personnel who are willing and able to serve."

US military policy currently classifies identifying as transgender as a psychological disorder, and standards require that anyone who has had transition-related surgery be rejected for service. The language the military currently has in its Standards of Medical Fitness excluding trans-identified folks was possibly based on an old version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) that said transgender people experience a "gender identity disorder." However, the most recent DSM classifies this as "gender dysphoria" and suggests that the condition is not be pathological.

"This is a little different than 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' Aaron Belkin, founder and director of the Palm Center, said. "With 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' [a former US policy that banned openly LGBT personnel that also prohibited discrimination against closeted LGBT personnel], you could really just get rid of the ban, and it was fine. With transgender inclusion, you don't want to just get rid of the ban and do nothing. There are a few steps, but those steps aren't difficult.


8/27/2014 - Study Highlights Disparities in Well-Being for Girls in Southern States

A recent report by the Girl Scouts Research Institute shows that the Midwest, Northeast, and Mid-Atlantic are the best regions of the United States to raise girls, while the South - specifically Mississippi, Arkansas, and Georgia - is the worst.

The findings were based on 23 indicators of education, extracurricular activities, emotional health, physical health, safety and economic well-being. States that offer preschool education and have low high school dropout rates are consistently ranked higher in terms of best places to raise young girls, with New Hampshire at the top. The Girl Scout Research Institute conducted the survey in response to changing demographics within the Girl Scouts of the USA.

"Our aim is to inspire a national dialogue about the challenges girls are facing in communities throughout America," said Anna Maria Chavez, the CEO of the Girl Scouts. "Only once we know where girls are succeeding and where our society needs to do more to support them can we help girls reach their maximum potential."

The higher rate of low-income children in the southern and western US play a large part in their lower ratings. A 2013 report by the Southern Education Foundation found that a majority of public school students throughout the Southern and Western United States are low-income. Mark Mather, lead researcher of the report and a demographer at the Population Reference Bureau, told Al Jazeera America that the difference between region rankings can also largely be attributed to the intersections between poverty and education. "[The report] tells the story of the importance of education for girls," Maher said.

"Girls are thriving in some areas, but there are portions of our population really left behind," Kamla Modi, senior researcher with the Girl Scout Research Institute and a co-author of the report, told AlJazeera. It's the first we've really seen how different the data is geographically. There are real issues girls are facing in the South.


8/27/2014 - White House Releases New Rules Governing Birth Control Mandate

Tthe White House released new health insurance rules Friday for nonprofit organizations and for-profit businesses to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby earlier this summer.

According to Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSBlog, the new rules seem to achieve two purposes: "to keep the mandate under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) within the new limits required by the Court's decision, and "to make sure that women who work for employers who object to the mandate for religious reasons would continue to have access to that coverage."

A fact sheet summarizing the new rules reiterated the health benefits of expanded preventive care, including contraceptive access. "The [Independent Institute of Medicine] recommended covering all FDA-approved contraceptive services for women with child-bearing capacity, as prescribed by a provider, because there are tremendous health benefits for women that come from using contraception."

The Supreme Court's decision in Hobby Lobby held that closely-held corporations, like Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., could claim a religious exemption from the ACA mandate under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and skip paying the cost of some forms of birth control believed to be in violation of the company's religious beliefs. The decision meant such businesses were eligible for the accommodation put in place by the White House for religious institutions, but immediately following Hobby Lobby, the accommodation form itself was challenged by Wheaton College.

Under the new rules, non-profit organizations must indicate their exemption status in writing to the Department of Health and Human Services. The for-profit rules issued by the White House do not set a standard definition of a "closely-held corporation." Instead the document says "the Departments are considering and seek comment on how to define a qualifying closely held for-profit entity."


8/27/2014 - California Legislature Votes to Restrict Sterilization of Prison Inmates

Both the California Senate and assembly unanimously passed a bill last week significantly restricting the sterilization of state prison inmates.

SB1135 bans the practice of sterilization with a few exceptions, including if the person's life is in danger or sterilization is medically necessary to treat a diagnosed condition. Jails and prisons will also be required to publish data about the procedures online, with the information broken down by race, age, and justification for the procedure.

The bill was introduced after an investigation by the Center for Investigative Reporting (CIR) found around 150 women may have been illegally sterilized without state approval between 2006 and 2010. Many women had been intensely pressured by prison doctors, and some were sterilized without the proper approval and documentation from the state. California has a history of forced sterilizations, with tens of thousands of sterilizations taking place in the 20th century of people deemed "unfit" to have children, and legislators have made several attempts to restrict the practice. The current bill aims to fill some of the gaps left by previous legislation restricting it.

"It's clear that we need to do more to make sure that forced or coerced sterilizations never again occur in our jails and prisons," Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), the author of the bill, said in a statement. "Pressuring a vulnerable population into making permanent reproductive choices without informed consent violates our most basic rights."

The bill now awaits Governor Jerry Brown's signature. If he does not sign it within 12 days, it will go into effect by default.


8/26/2014 - Women's Equality Goes Pop (Quiz)!

ARLINGTON -- Women's Equality Day commemorates the passage of the 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution. The 19th Amendment granted women the right to vote in 1920, but it was a right that took decades to realize. This landmark Amendment institutionalized every person's right to participate in the electoral process regardless of sex, and now it's time to use the priceless power of the vote to advance another crucial amendment for women's rights: the Equal Rights Amendment.

This Women's Equality Day, the Feminist Majority Foundation is taking this important anniversary in the fight for women's suffrage to continue building momentum around the Equal Rights Amendment with an online quiz testing voters' knowledge of the ERA.

The Equal Rights Amendment will finally cement equal rights under the law - for all - for the first time ever in the United States Constitution. Now it's time to make sure voters know what the ERA is all about, and how they can be agents in the fight to ratify the ERA right now!

WHAT YOU MAY NOT KNOW:


  • The Illinois state senate approved the ERA by a 60 percent majority in 2014. The Illinois House could vote to bring the US one state closer to ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment in the 2014 November veto session. Illinois would become the 36th state. We need 38.

  • Oregon voters could pass a state ERA when Measure 89 goes to a vote in November 2014.

  • Now, in Nevada, a leading state legislator is contemplating introducing a resolution to ratify the ERA in 2015.

  • Full ratification of the ERA would, for the first time, create a national legal standard for the elimination of discrimination against women in all areas of life, including equal pay.

  • The ERA would change the burden of proof in sex discrimination cases to a higher level of scrutiny under the law.

  • The ERA would strengthen enforcement of laws against gender-based violence and expand federal power to prosecute these crimes.

  • The ERA would prohibit pregnancy discrimination.


Take the quiz and join the conversation all day long: Follow @majorityspeaks, @femmajority and #WED2014 all day for reasons to ratify the #ERANow!


###


ERA BACKGROUND: http://bit.ly/1AOD0p2


ERA FACT SHEET: http://bit.ly/1pk8PiO



WHEN: Tuesday, August 26, 2014

WHERE: Online

WHAT: Pop Quiz for Equality




8/26/2014 - More Investment in Women's Health Needed as Africa's Population Rises

Africa's population will reach four billion by 2100, according to a report released by UNICEF early this week. As the population grows, more investment in maternal health and family planning resources will be needed to ensure women's reproductive health.

The authors of the report, titled Generation 2030 Africa, predict 1.8 billion births will occur in Africa over the next 35 years. By 2050, children born in Africa will make up 40 percent of children under 18 worldwide, and the number of women of reproductive age will double in the next 35 years.

Although fertility rates have fallen in Africa, an average of 5.2 children are still born to each African woman, far outpacing the rates for other regions. This high rate may be partially attributed to lack of access to family planning resources. In Cameroon, close to two-thirds of women have an unmet need for contraception. They cite several reasons for not using contraception, including the lack of adequately trained health care providers, frequent unavailability of contraceptive supplies, and limited choice of methods. In Nigeria, the Nigerian Democratic Health Survey found that only 9.8 percent of Nigerian women use family planning, while 16.1 percent have an unmet need for family planning services. Additionally, Africa has a high child mortality rate, with one out of every 11 African child dying by age five.

"We want to see African leaders... make the correct and right investments in children that are needed to build a skilled, dynamic African labor force that's productive and can grow, and can add value to the economy," said lead author David Anthony in an interview with NPR.

At the recent 2014 US-Africa White House Leaders Summit, President Obama and other speakers also emphasized the need to address the status of women and girls across the African continent. In addition to public and private commitments of up to $33 billion for trade and investment, the United States called on leaders of the African continent to make a considerable investment in advancing the status of women and girls, which would potentially help reduce the maternal mortality and population growth rate.


8/26/2014 - 92 Million Dollar Project Will Improve Higher Education in Afghanistan

The US Agency for International Development (USAID) announced a $92 million project to improve the higher education system in Afghanistan last week.

The University Support and Workforce Development Project (USWDP) represents a five-year plan between USAID and the Afghan Ministry of Higher Education (MoHE) and Ministry of Economy to improve Afghanistan's educational programs according to international standards. The USWDP will encompass faculty and student training sessions, curriculum changes, management changes at MoHE, and efforts to improve access to higher education in the region.

This represents a milestone in improving the higher education system in Afghanistan, Minister of Higher Education Obaidullah Obaid said in the press release announcing the partnership.

Since the fall of the Taliban, women and girls in Afghanistan have seen unprecedented access to educational opportunities thanks to the work of activists in Afghanistan and abroad and the support of the US government. "Thirteen years back - during the dark era of the Taliban - it was merely a dream for Shora Qadiri and other girls to go to school," Feminist Majority Foundation Global Issues Associate Fatema Syed wrote on the FMF blog in May. "But now, after the collapse of the Taliban regime and with the help of the international community, Afghan girls are once again attending school, at the primary secondary, and university levels, and they are proving that if given opportunities, they can thrive."

USAID has already contributed $1.1 billion to the improvement of Afghanistan's education. In July, the agency announced "Promote," a five-year program seeking to educate, promote, and train women between 18 and 30 in the region. Previously, the agency launched a program aimed at increasing literacy for Afghan women and girls called Afghanistan Reads that established community libraries and opened up literacy classes for 840 women.


8/25/2014 - Advocates Seek to Block Louisiana TRAP Law in Federal Suit

Friday, the Center for Reproductive Rights joined a federal lawsuit challenging a Louisiana TRAP (Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers) law set to take effect September 1.

The suit, filed on behalf of health care workers in Baton Rouge, seeks an injunction against Louisiana HB 388, which requires abortion providers in the state to obtain local hospital admitting privileges. Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal signed HB 388 into law in June. In the written complaint, the Center for Reproductive Rights argued that the law makes an impossible demand since hospitals will not be able to respond to providers about admitting privileges before the law takes effect.

"Although all of Clinic Plaintiff's physicians who do not have admitting privileges have applied for such privileges at a local hospital, there is not enough time for the hospitals to consider and decide the submitted applications before the Act takes effect," the complaint reads. "The process of applying for privileges and receiving a decision from a hospital on such an application can and generally does take months."

HB 388 will effectively close any clinics located in rural areas or other neighborhoods without a hospital located within 30 mile, and also instated a 24-hour waiting period on surgical abortions. The law was modeled after a similar law in Texas which has decimated clinic access across the state.

Nancy Northrup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, reiterated widely shared frustration about the function of the law in a statement released Friday. "Leading national medical associations oppose admitting privileges requirements and federal courts nationwide have blocked them, recognizing them as the underhanded attempts to ban abortion that they really are," Northrup said. "Louisiana is the latest state to advance the unconstitutional objective of denying women safe, legal abortion care under the phony pretext of protecting their health."

Attorneys for Hope Medical Group for Women, Causeway Medical Clinic, and Bossier City Medical Suite are named as plaintiffs in the suit. If the law goes forward, the Center for Reproductive Rights said three of the five clinics in the state would be forced to stop providing abortion services or close altogether.


8/25/2014 - California Reverses Decision Allowing Catholic Colleges to Refuse to Cover Abortion

Two Catholic universities in California will no longer be allowed to exclude abortion coverage from their health insurance plans, according to a decision from the state;s Department of Managed Health Care.

The state of California had previously decided to allow the insurance companies for Loyola Marymount and Santa Clara universities to deny abortion coverage, except in cases where it was needed to save a woman's life or health. On Friday, Governor Jerry Brown's Department of Managed Health Care reversed the decision, citing a 1975 state law requiring group health plans to cover all basic services, and sent letters to the insurance companies to inform them of the change.

"Abortion is a basic health care service," said the department's director, Michelle Rouillard, in the letter. "The California Constitution prohibits health plans from discriminating against women who choose to terminate a pregnancy. Thus, all health plans must treat maternity services and legal abortion neutrally."

The universities employ around 1,000 people each. Faculty groups at both universities protested the exclusion of abortion coverage.

Other religious colleges have tried to cut abortion and contraceptive coverage as well by challenging the contraceptive coverage mandate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which requires health insurance providers to cover preventive health services including all FDA-approved contraceptives, such as the pill, emergency contraceptives, and IUDs without charging co-pays, deductibles, or co-insurance. In July, a majority of the US Supreme Court granted a temporary emergency injunction to Wheaton College, a Christian college in Illinois, ruling that the school does not have to comply with the ACA contraceptive coverage benefit.


8/25/2014 - Advocates for Youth, Feminist Majority Foundation, Planned Parenthood Generation Launch

WASHINGTON, DC -- Advocates for Youth (Advocates), Feminist Majority Foundation (FMF), and Planned Parenthood Generation (PPGen), a project of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, are joining forces for an exciting new national civil engagement campaign - the 2014 Youth ShowOUT!

In 2014, young voters will do more than just turn out - they will ShowOUT! Youth leaders are educating their peers, registering voters, participating in voter pledge drives, volunteering, and more. Young people are at the helm of lasting change in our country. They are taking charge and becoming part of the political process.

"The Feminist Majority Foundation is proud to join Youth ShowOUT," said Eleanor Smeal, President of the Feminist Majority Foundation. "Young women have much at stake in this election - access to abortion, birth control and comprehensive health insurance, pay equity, ending violence against women, comprehensive immigration reform, and equal rights. Our organizers on college campuses throughout the country will help to ensure that student votes are not suppressed and that young women and people of color, who have been traditionally targeted for suppression, are heard at the ballot box."

"No person in our country should face barriers in accessing health care, exercising their right to vote, marrying the person they love, or pursuing other fundamental rights," said Kelley Robinson, Assistant Director of Youth Organizing, Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "Planned Parenthood Generation is a movement of young people across identities and issues that advocates for their generation to change the world. We must work together and strive to develop strong leaders with the spirit and determination to move our country forward and show that we are a nation committed to fighting for and preserving equality for all."

"Young people are an essential component of the rising electorate. Every day, nearly 12,000 young people turn 18 years old and become eligible to vote," said Debra Hauser, president of Advocates for Youth. "At Advocates for Youth, we know firsthand the power of young people is undeniable. There are tens of thousands of youth activists and leaders who are actively reshaping their communities and changing what politics looks like in this country. We have a responsibility to work alongside these young people as they lead us to new solutions and lasting change."

More information is available at YouthShowOut.org.

###


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT:
Taylor Kuether, tkuether@feminist.org, 703-522-2214


8/25/2014 - Moral Mondays Movement Expands to Other States for the Moral Week of Action

The Moral Mondays movement, which consists of weekly protests in North Carolina against the state legislature's far-right policies, has announced a Moral Week of Action from August 22 to 28 that will take place in 11 additional states. Now, faith, labor, and social justice activists in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Wisconsin will be holding protests of their own.

Moral Mondays protests have been taking place in Raleigh for almost 70 consecutive weeks. At the helm of the movement is Reverend William Barber, who preaches in advocacy of progressive ideas and has called for "a moral fusion movement" to push back against policies that harm vulnerable or otherwise underprivileged communities, often in the name of religion. The Moral Mondays movements protest issues ranging from union-busting to infringement on reproductive rights to cuts in social spending.

During the Moral Week of Action, protests will take place every day outside the North Carolina state capitol in Raleigh. Each day, those protest center on a different issue. Today was "Youth Moral Monday," and on August 26, the activists will focus on women's rights to commemorate Women's Equality Day. On Thursday, August 28, voting rights will take the stage to coincide with the 51st anniversary of the March on Washington. Other participating states are holding daily rallies, and some are also hosting larger one-day events throughout the week.

Events are available via livestream. HKonJ People's Assembly Coalition has more information about the Moral Week of Action and the events around the country.


8/22/2014 - Ohio TRAP Law Forces Cincinnati Clinic to Shut Down

The Greater Cincinnati, Ohio area will lose one of its abortion providers today when the Lebanon Road Surgery Center closes its doors. The clinic closure is another loss for Ohio women whose access to comprehensive reproductive care has been limited by a 2013 TRAP law.

The Lebanon Road Surgery Center in Sharonville, Ohio once provided 2,000 abortions a year. When it is forced to shut down today, it will leave just two clinics in southwest Ohio and a total of nine clinics in the entire state.

Last year, Ohio Governor John Kasich (R) signed into law new state rules prohibiting publicly funded hospitals from having patient transfer agreements with abortion clinics, while at the same time upholding an existing Ohio law that requires clinics to have patient transfer agreements. The Lebanon Road Surgery Center had operated through a variance to the rule, but its variance was denied in 2012 and the state ordered the clinic's closure. The Sharonville center had until this week to file an appeal. Dorothea Langsam, an attorney and spokesperson for the clinic, said the cost of litigation became too much.

The two remaining clinics in southwest Ohio are also in jeopardy. Both clinics applied to the Ohio Department of Health more than a year ago for the same variance that was denied Lebanon Road. The clinics are still awaiting a decision.

Under Kasich's Administration, there have been four clinic closures, more than any other governor in the last 14 years, according to the Dayton Daily News. Kasich has also cut $2 million in family planning funds from Planned Parenthood and redirected those funds to misleading crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs).

"Gov. (John) Kasich ran and won by promising jobs," Feminist Majority President Eleanor Smeal said. "Once he got elected, he didn't talk about jobs. He talked about controlling a woman's uterus."


8/22/2014 - Supreme Court Blocks Marriage Equality in Virginia

The US Supreme Court granted a request Wednesday to stay a decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit overturning Virginia's marriage equality ban. The appeals court decision - finding the ban unconstitutional - would have allowed same-sex couples to start getting married this week in Virginia.

"Loving couples and families should not have to endure yet another standstill before their commitment to one another is recognized here in Virginia," said James Parrish, Executive Director of Equality Virginia.

The Supreme Court's decision means that Virginia is also not required to recognize same-sex marriages performed out-of-state.

Lambda Legal, which filed one of the lawsuits that led to the Fourth Circuit decision, vowed to "do everything in our power to make sure this issue is decided as quickly as possible" by the US Supreme Court. The Supreme Court issued a similar stay on same-sex marriages in Utah last January.

Same-sex couples currently have the right to marry in 19 states and in Washington, D.C., and there are lawsuits on the matter pending in all remaining states. Virginia's attorney general, Mark R. Herring, refuses to defend the state's same-sex marriage ban and is pushing to have the Supreme Court review the case.

In a news conference in Richmond, Virginia, when the Fourth Circuit decision was announced, Herring said, Sometimes battles have been fought in the legislature, sometimes in the courtroom, sometimes even in the streets, but inevitably no effort to restrict the rights or limit the opportunities of our fellow Americans has ever succeeded in the long term.

The Fourth Circuit includes North Carolina, South Carolina and West Virginia.


8/21/2014 - Flexible Work Requests Produce Fatherhood Bonus and Motherhood Penalty

According to a recent study, men who request flexible work schedules are advantaged over women who make the same requests.

In the study by Dr. Christin Munsch, an assistant professor of sociology at Furman University in South Carolina, a sample of 646 people between the ages of 18 and 65 living in the United States were asked to read a transcript of a fabricated conversation between an employee and human resources person. During the conversation, the employee either requested flexible work hours or to work from home a few days per week or did not make a request. Participants were then asked how likely they would be to grant the request and to evaluate the employees on their likeability, commitment, dependability, and dedication.

What Dr. Munsch found was a "fatherhood bonus" for men who requested flexible work schedules in order to fulfill child care obligations.

About 70 percent of the participants who read a transcript with a male employee said they would be "likely" or "very likely" to approve his request when it was for child care reasons, compared to only 56.7 percent of those who read the same transcript with a female employee. About 24 percent found the man to be "extremely likeable" compared to only three percent who found the woman "extremely likeable." Interestingly, only 2.7 percent found the man to be "not at all" or "not very committed," while 15.5 percent found the woman to be "not at all" or "not very committed."

"These results demonstrate how cultural notions of parenting influence perceptions of people who request flexible work," explained Dr. Munsch. "Today, we think of women's responsibilities as including paid labor and domestic obligations, but we still regard breadwinning as men's primary responsibility and we feel grateful if men contribute in the realm of childcare or to other household tasks."

Whereas men are rewarded at work for trying to help out at home, women continue to be penalized. The reason? Entrenched gender stereotypes. People continue to believe that men will meet their obligations at work - because they are men. In other words, according to Dr. Munsch, "We think, What a great guy."

"For a mother, we think there's no way she can work at home effectively. This goes back to our expectation that motherhood is intensive and that being a mother should be a woman's number one priority, Munsch told the Washington Post. So if she's working flexibly at home, we expect that she'll be putting puzzles together with her kids or taking them to the park. We think, How could she possibly get her work done? But with a man, we think he'll just plop his kids in front of the TV and get the job done.

Dr. Munsch's study suggests that flexible work schedules - on their own - are not enough to counter gender inequality in the workplace. Without oversight into how these policies are implemented, they may serve to promote gender inequity.


8/21/2014 - Reproductive Justice Activists Testify Before UN About Health Care Discrimination

A joint study by three major women's health advocacy groups calls attention to the overwhelming disparity in health outcomes for women of color in the United States. The results of the study are now under the consideration of the United Nations.

The Center for Reproductive Rights, SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, and the National Institute for Reproductive Health (NLIRH) released the report last week during the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination's (CERD Committee) review of the United States in Geneva, Switzerland. The study found that African-American women are four times as likely to die in childbirth as their white counterparts. The data reflect that the problem is particularly astute in the US south. Citing the World Health Organization, the groups said the maternal mortality in the United States actually increased in the period between 1990 and 2013, doubling the mortality rate in Saudi Arabia, and tripling the United Kingdom.

Women without US citizenship were also three times less likely to have private or public health insurance, resulting in minimal to no access to comprehensive reproductive health care. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) preserved a 1996 restriction requiring non-citizens to wait five years before enrolling in Medicaid, with many still barred after obtaining lawful status. The study reported that even private exchanges are off-limits to undocumented persons under the ACA. The organizations detailed how racial discrimination at the level of policy and implementation undermine women of color and migrant women's fundamental human right to health.

The groups applauded the passage of the ACA and the domestic movement to expand Medicaid as steps in the right direction, but noted the strong political resistance even to these policy efforts.

"For too long, these women, their families, and their communities have been shut out of this country's health care system," said Angela Hooton, the state policy and advocacy director at the Center for Reproductive Rights. "A woman's race or immigration status should never determine whether she will survive childbirth or access critical cancer treatments," Hooton continued. "The United Nations must hold the US government accountable for these grave injustices."

The UN CERD Committee is an independent body of experts that monitors participating countries' implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. In 2008, the committee "expressed concern about persistent disparities in sexual and reproductive health" and called on the US to "increase efforts to expand health insurance coverage, facilitate access to maternal health care and family planning, and improve sexuality education and information."


8/21/2014 - Ugandan President Signs Law Making HIV Transmission Illegal

A bill that criminalizes HIV transmission has been signed into law by Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni.

Provisions of the law include possible imprisonment of HIV-positive individuals, a ten-year prison sentence and fine for the "intentional transmission of HIV," a five-year prison sentence for "attempted transmission of HIV," and compulsory testing in some situations. The law also allows courts to order the release a person's HIV status without that person's consent. The signing comes not long after the Ugandan Constitutional Court struck down the country's Anti-Homosexuality Act, a law that many believed would steer LGBT people away from getting necessary health services.

The new law was denounced earlier this year by the United States - the biggest funder of Ugandan HIV/AIDS programs. After the Ugandan Parliament voted in favor of the legislation, but before Museveni signed the bill into law, US Global AIDS coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx called on Uganda to reject criminalization of HIV transmission.

Over the past 30 years, we have witnessed time and again how stigma, discrimination, and fear - and the misguided policies that stem from them - further fuel the epidemic by deterring those most in need from accessing lifesaving HIV prevention, treatment, and care services," said Dr. Birx. "I join with the many health practitioners, HIV/AIDS and human rights activists, multilateral institutions, and individuals everywhere - in Uganda and around the world - in calling for the people and the Government of Uganda to reject this regressive bill.

The stigma against those with HIV/AIDS is not limited to Uganda. HIV transmission is criminalized in many US states, too, where there have been 200 prosecutions against people on charges related to HIV transmission. And too often, HIV transmission is not fully understood. This ignorance was apparent in Texas, for example, where a man with HIV was sentenced to 35 years for spitting at a police officer - even though the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention maintain that contact with saliva, tears or sweat has never been shown to result in transmission of HIV."

The Center for HIV Law and Policy says, "Many people with HIV internalize and accept this judgment and the perception of those with HIV as toxic, highly infectious, or dangerous to be around. This has serious adverse ramifications for those individuals, as well as on the broader effort to combat HIV."