Migration Category: NCWP Old Site

Today, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case that pits law schools’ anti-discrimination policies against the military’s anti-gay policies and on-campus recruitment efforts. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights (FAIR) v. Rumsfeld addresses the constitutionality of the Solomon Amendment, passed in 1994, which requires universities to give the military the same access to on-campus recruiting as given to other employers, or risk losing public funding.

A coalition of law schools has argued that the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy conflicts with university non-discrimination policies; schools that require recruiters be non-discriminatory would have to make special accommodations for the military. The Christian Science Monitor quotes a brief on behalf of the schools, written by E. Joshua Rosenkranz, as saying “It is a demand that a law school accord the military ‘most-favored-recruiter’ status, even as the recruiters discriminate against the school’s own students.”

The Third US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the schools in November 2004. The case is being closely watched, as it is the first gay rights case before the Supreme Court since 2003. Furthermore, how the ruling is decided may affect many civil rights statutes, such as Title IX, that use the threat of withdrawing government funding to encourage non-discrimination.

The US Supreme Court today agreed to hear a sexual harassment case involving the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway. The plaintiff, Sheila White, was hired as a forklift operator in Memphis, Tennessee for the railroad company in 1997. White was the only woman working at the railroad yard, and she alleged that she was being sexually harassed by the foreman and co-workers. When she complained to the foreman’s supervisor, she was reassigned to a much physically harder job at the railyard, according to the Associated Press. White then filed claims with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charging sexual discrimination and retaliation. Two days after the EEOC mailed the charges to White’s supervisor, she was suspended without pay for insubordination.

A jury agreed with White’s retaliation claim, and awarded her $43,500, but rejected her other claims, according to the Legal Intelligencer. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the jury’s decision and decided against White on all counts, the Intelligencer reports.

At issue before the Supreme Court is whether White’s reassignment constituted a “materially adverse” employment action and what evidence is needed for a jury to award punitive damages, according to the Associated Press.

The Supreme Court will hear two related cases on Wednesday involving violence against women’s health clinics and access to abortion services. The cases, Scheidler v. National Organization for Women (NOW), et. al. and Operation Rescue v. National Organization for Women, et. al., stem from a case initiated in 1986 by Eleanor Smeal as president of the National Organization for Women (Smeal is currently president of the Feminist Majority Foundation).

This is the third time the Supreme Court will be considering this class action case on behalf of all women who could potentially be patients of women’s health care clinics and virtually all women’s health care providers.

NOW, with the Delaware Women’s Health Organization and the Summit Women’s Health Organization, both owned and operated by the National Women’s Health Organization, filed this case in an effort to stop a nationwide pattern of crimes, including violent assaults and physical attacks on patients, doctors, clinic staff, and police, as well as destruction of medical equipment, supplies, and other clinic property.

At issue is a nationwide injunction prohibiting PLAN and Operation Rescue from conducting blockades, trespassing, damaging property, or committing acts of violence directed at the clinics. The injunction has not affected peaceful protests. Also at issue is whether the Hobbs Act, a federal statute, can be used to curb such violence and whether violations of the Act are sufficient to support the imposition of the nationwide injunction.

LEARN MORE Visit the Feminist Majority Foundation’s resource page on these critical Supreme Court cases.

DONATE to the Feminist Majority Foundation’s National Clinic Access Project, working to keep women’s health care clinics safe and open.

In a move that could destroy victim confidentiality and discourage sexual assault reporting, the Army has announced plans to create a database system to log the names and comprehensive personal information of any alleged sexual assault victim or assailant associated with the Armed Forces in any way. According to the Federal Register notice, the database, known as the Sexual Assault Data Management System (SADMS) will become effective on Friday, November 25 unless “comments are received that would result in a contrary determination.”

The database would contain information about any victims of sexual assault committed by a member of the Armed Forces, as well as about any perpetrator who assaults a member of the Armed Forces. Personal information recorded would include name, Social Security Number, demographic data, any military service record, and possibly law enforcement and medical data connected to the assault. There is not yet a plan for the duration of these records, which will be considered permanent until such a plan is made, reports Government Executive. The users of SADMS are not specified beyond “authorized personnel who have official need in the performance of their assigned duties,” according to the Federal Register, raising questions about possible misuse of the information.

The National Organization for Women is asking for people to submit comments to the Army and Department of Defense opposing the creation of these identifying records before Friday of this week. The Miles Foundation, which assists military survivors of sexual assault, is also concerned about the possible uses of the database, and spokeswoman Anita Sanchez told Government Executive, “This poses some very serious questions about privacy and due process. This database is going to contain identifying information for an alleged victim or an alleged assailant.”

TAKE ACTION with the National Organization for Women against this proposal

In a win for reproductive rights advocates, federal Circuit Court Judge Charles Atwell on Monday issued a preliminary injunction barring the enforcement of a state law allowing civil suits to be brought against anyone who “intentionally cause[s], aid[s]or assist[s]” in a minor obtaining an abortion without parental or judicial consent. Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri filed a lawsuit challenging the law in October. Monday’s injunction extends Atwell’s previous stay on the law, at which time he said that the new law “likely violated constitutional rights to free speech and due process and could cause irreparable harm to Planned Parenthood and its patients,” reports the Associated Press.

Eve Gartner, lawyer for Planned Parenthood, argued in October that the law could be variously interpreted to allow lawsuits against anyone who advised pregnant teenagers about their options.

DONATE to protect the right to a safe, legal abortion

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a sex-discrimination suit on Monday against Fox News, on behalf of former employee Kim Weiler. The suit seeks new policies at Fox News to combat discrimination and demands punitive damages.

The complaint focuses on a vice president, Joe Chillemi, who supervises Fox Advertising and Promotions. According to the New York Times, the suit alleges that he used “gross obscenities and vulgarities when describing women or their body parts” that he “did not use with male employees” and that he “routinely cursed at and otherwise denigrated women employees.” The suit also cites a discussion of sexism in the workplace, in which “Chillemi said that in choosing who to hire, ‘If it came down between a man or a woman, of course I’d pick the man. The woman would most likely get pregnant and leave,'” reports the Associated Press. Finally, the lawsuit charges that women at Fox News were disproportionately hired in freelance or other less secure positions, and that Weiler’s dismissal was retaliation for her complaints of sex discrimination.

Fox News host Bill O’Reilly was accused of sexual harassment last year by his former producer. He and the producer settled the suit out of court for what was believed to be millions of dollars.

Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) recently reintroduced legislation allocating three years of funds to improve the military’s response to rape cases. The bill, H.R. 4077, is known as the Preventing Sexual Assaults in the Military Act of 2005. It aims to cover the costs of processing the backlog of DNA evidence, improving DNA testing procedures, providing sufficient numbers of forensic evidence kits to military academies and bases, and ensuring that either a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner or Sexual Assault Forensic Examiner is on duty at all times in each academy, base, or theater of operations.

“Rapes and sexual assaults are far too common in both civilian life and the military,” Maloney said. “This legislation will bring proper medical care to military rape victims and will bring justice by using DNA technology to identify perpetrators.”

The number of women in prison in the US grew by four percent between 2003 and 2004, nearly double the increase among male prisoners. The Associated Press reports that 7 percent of all inmates are now women, and women account for almost one-quarter of all arrests.

Paige M. Harrison, co-author of a Bureau of Justice Statistics report, linked the increase in incarcerated women to increased arrests of women for drug crimes, violent crime, and fraud, reports the Washington Post, as well as to longer sentences. The Sentencing Project attributes the increase to the sentencing policies of the so-called war on drugs, and raised questions about United States incarceration policies, as the US incarceration rate is 25 percent higher than any other nation, according to the Post.

Once incarcerated, women’s needs are often overlooked in the prison system, as they compete with sex offenders and death-row inmates for limited funding. Louise Wolfgramm, president of Amicus, a Minneapolis-based program assisting criminal offenders, told the Associated Press that women inmates “need to focus more on learning healthy relationships and developing the skills to navigate through the messy lives they’ve been enveloped in.” Between 66 and 90 percent of women inmates have children, and advocates say that maintaining contact with children is key to reducing future crime rates, according to the Associated Press. Mary Scully Whitaker, an organizer of the five-day conference on adult and juvenile women inmates, told the Associated Press that the shortfall in funds for treatment programs aimed at women is “short-sighted. Women respond well to treatment.”

DONATE Help empower women by sponsoring a Ms. membership for a woman in prison or a domestic violence shelter

A California bill signed into law last week includes a ban on shackling women during labor, delivery and recovery. According to reports by Salon.com and the San Jose Mercury News, shackling women inmates during labor had been a routine practice in California prisons, despite no recorded instances of escape or assault by a prisoner giving birth. “The United Nations has established minimum rules for treatment of prisoners and California has not been following them,” said Assemblywoman Sally J. Lieber (D-San Jose), the bill’s author, adding, “It is inconceivable in this day and age that human beings would be shackled while giving birth,” according to Medical News Today.

Supported by California NOW, the ACLU, and The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, among others, the bill also ensures that inmates receive adequate prenatal and postnatal care, including access to vitamins and a basic dental cleaning. An average of 185 women give birth in California prisons each year.

Shackling pregnant women remains legal in at least 20 states.

DONATE a Ms. membership to a woman in prison. Help reach out to women in need with the Ms. message of hope, change, women’s empowerment and sisterhood.

The Senate unanimously voted on Tuesday in favor of the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). The House passed its version on September 29, but the Senate did not vote before VAWA expired on October 1. Tuesday’s vote ensures that programs receiving VAWA funding will be able to continue.

Senator Joe Biden, co-author of the 2005 VAWA and author of the landmark 1994 and 2000 VAWA, called the legislation “critical to ensuring the safety and well-being of our nation’s women and children.” Lynn Rosenthal, president of the National Network to End Domestic Violence says the reauthorization demonstrates “that the nation’s leaders recognize the importance of continuing and strengthening services that support victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking.”

VAWA now moves to conference committee, where differences between the House and Senate versions will be ironed out into a final version.