NOTE EARLY START TIME:  6:30 PM

Reproductive Rights Under Attack: Status and Recourse

With Leah Litman, JD, Assistant Professor, University of Michigan School of Law, Co-Host, Strict Scrutiny podcast

In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court found, in Roe v. Wade, a constitutional right to abortion protected by the core principles of privacy and liberty. In the decades since that landmark decision, conservative state legislatures have passed numerous laws to challenge the reach and stability of the precedent. In the last two decades, the evolving Court has allowed increasingly onerous encroachments on women’s right to make private decisions about their reproductive choices. Now, with a strong conservative bloc on the Court, many observers believe that this crucial 50-year-old precedent is on the verge of being gutted, if not overturned entirely. What is the status of the conservative attack on reproductive rights, and what can citizens do to robustly protect women’s right to make private decisions about their bodies?

 Speaker

Professor Leah Litman teaches and writes on constitutional law, federal post-conviction review, and federal sentencing. Her recent work has appeared or will appear in the California Law Review, Michigan Law Review, Virginia Law Review, Duke Law Journal, and Northwestern Law Review, among other journals. Her writing for popular audiences has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and Slate. In addition, she is one of the co-hosts and creators of Strict Scrutiny, a podcast about the U.S. Supreme Court, and a co-creator of Women Also Know Law (inspired by Women Also Know Stuff), a tool to enable journalists and others to discover and promote the expertise of women in academia. Professor Litman maintains an active pro bono practice. She was part of the litigation team in Garcia v. United States, one of the successful challenges to the rescission of the DACA program, for which the team was recognized as California Lawyers of the Year. In the Supreme Court, she was on the merits briefs in Hernandez v. Mesa and Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt.