The Return of the Abortion Restrictions

Given what we've talked about and read last week and this week, it would seem that some restrictions on abortion (waiting periods, informed consent, etc.) are old news. But check out this NPR story about a wave of renewed state-level legislation on abortion. I would suspect that one of these might make a great exam question, and I'd certainly write a question about this if I were writing the exam. What do you make of this new trend? What is driving this? I would think about this in terms of the socio-political context, including popular political movements as well as composition of and trends on the Supreme Court bench. I'd also consider if there is any new information here; perhaps old precedents are time-bound in some way? Generally speaking, is any of this constitutional? If so, which parts? What will this Court do in the face of a direct (or partial) challenge to Roe v. Wade and its progeny?

The Last Abortion Clinic

Today, we'll be dealing with questions about access to abortion. We will be watching The Last Abortion Clinic in class. If you would like to see it again, you can watch it for free online <a href="http://digital.films.com/PortalViewVideo.aspx?xtid=40903">here</a>. Just remember that you'll either need to be online at UNLV, or you'll have to log in using the proxy server. The link from the library's website is <a href="http://webpac.library.unlv.edu/search~S1/?searchtype=.&searcharg=b3948823">here</a>, and information about off-campus access is <a href="http://www.library.unlv.edu/help/remote.html">here</a>.

Where is the Life Line?

In on Wednesday, 9/24, we're going to talk about a very controversial article from the Journal of Medical Ethics. It is quite short, and you should be familiar with it before you arrive in class today. Find a copy of it here. As you read this, consider how this article illustrates why Americans may never come to an agreement on abortion policy.

Sex-Selection

Here's an article that is relevant to one of the four paper topics: http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/why-are-americans-selecting-baby-girls-over-boys

Constitution Day

Remember that this year's Constitution Day festivities include a lecture on Contraception and the Constitution. Extra credit is available to those who attend and sign the sheet. The talk is at 7:30 pm on Monday, 9/17 at the Barrick Museum Auditorium. More details are here.

Bradwell v. Illinois: A Reenactment

What follows is a long video. It is nearly an hour long, and for this reason it is recommended and not required viewing. This is a reenactment of <i>Bradwell v. Illinois</i> (1873). It is notable for many reasons, among them performance of one of our current Supreme Court Justices. If you have the time and inclination, I recommend this.



Setting the "stage" for the next panel, we will travel back to 1872 and have a chance to observe the oral argument before the United States Supreme Court in Bradwell v. Illinois. Myra Bradwell, a married woman, was found qualified to practice law but denied admission to the Bar by the Supreme Court of Illinois on the grounds "[t]hat God designed the sexes to occupy different spheres of action, and that it belonged to men to make, apply, and execute the laws." The United States Supreme Court heard the case. We will have a chance to
hear the argument — or a creative, updated version of it, with different advocates and a different outcome. Ms. Arabella Mansfield, the first women lawyer in the United States, will be arguing arguing for Ms. Bradwell (although in fact, Ms. Bradwell was represented by a male lawyer, and Illinois will be well represented (although, in fact, the state was so sure of the outcome that it did not send any representative to argue in the Court). Should women be able to practice law? Does the United States Constitution have anything to say on the subject? Come and find out.

Introduction: 

• Hon. Marsha S. Berzon, Circuit Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Reenactment: 

Members of the U.S. Supreme Court:

• Hon. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Associate Justice, U.S. Supreme Court
• Hon. Richard R. Clifton, Circuit Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Hon. Sidney R. Thomas, Circuit Judge U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Advocates:

• Judith Resnik, Arthur Liman, Professor of Law, Yale Law School
• Carter G. Phillips, Esq., Sidley Austin LLP

Recorded: August 18, 2011
2011 Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference

Video Clip for Class, 9/10

The video clip from today's class comes from PBS's 3/4/2011 "To the Contrary" Episode called "Women's History Month--Equal Rights Amendment." gram: To The Contrary

Episode: Women's History Month - Equal Rights Amendment

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) talks about what she and other women's rights advocates are doing to guarantee women equal protection under the U.S. Constitution

Duration: (3:16)
Premiere Date: 03/04/2011
Episode Expires: Never
TV Rating: NR

Watch Women's History Month - Equal Rights Amendment on PBS. See more from To The Contrary.

Updates

I have completed the group reading summary blogs. You should post your reviews to the blog, making sure that you personally post one review per four extra readings in the syllabus. You'll need to coordinate the schedule with your group. If you have a group with five members, you will need to duplicate one of the readings.

You will also notice that there is a peer review mechanism associated with the reading summary blog. You will need to read and assess the reading summaries posted by each of your groupmates. Please review these within a week after the reading was assigned. Keep in mind that your evaluations will be seen only by the author of the summary. Your identity will be concealed from the author of the summary, who will see only your evaluation and comments. Only our graduate assistant (Mr. O'Neal) and I will be able to connect your identity with your review.

Mr. O'Neal and I will also provide you feedback on your summaries.

In addition, I have added a page of links to the full text of the cases. This page is in the Readings folder, which is linked on the main WebCampus page for our course.

Equal Rights Amendment

In the course of the next couple of classes, we'll begin to learn a bit about the campaign for the Equal Rights Amendment. The long and failed campaign for an ERA is an interesting story, and it encapsulates many of the dilemmas that we'll be dealing with over the course of the semester. Certainly, feminists themselves were divided over what sex equality ought to look like. There were also major conflicts over the strategy for achieving these rights. Many argued that a constitutional amendment was not the ideal avenue, instead arguing for a piecemeal approach. This type of approach, in the view of many, would rely heavily on the Supreme Court and a reinterpretation of the Equal Protection Clause. This might also be seen as a relatively risky strategy in light of the Supreme Court's history on Equal Protection issues. Indeed, the story of the ERA's failure might also be seen as a story of the Supreme Court stealing the ERA's thunder. As the Supreme Court began to chip away at the most egregious examples of sex discrimination, it also undermined some of the most persuasive arguments in favor of the ERA. Consider this as you watch the video below.