Publications

Summary of Argument Idaho’s near-total abortion ban restricts access to necessary emergency reproductive healthcare, exacerbating preventable maternal mortality and morbidity and otherwise negatively impacting people capable of pregnancy in Idaho. The law’s narrow exception for life-saving care will not prevent or mitigate these harms in practice, and will leave patients in Idaho without access to emergency reproductive healthcare. The United States has ratified several human rights treaties—including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), and the Convention Against Torture (CAT)—which require it to guarantee access to safe and legal abortion services, in particular in emergencies or acute medical crises governed by the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). In accordance with the United States’ obligations under these treaties, the federal government—and therefore each state—is required to respect, protect and fulfil individuals’ international human rights to life; health; privacy; non-discrimination; and to be free from torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. These rights are directly jeopardized by Idaho’s draconian abortion law.

On October 17-18 in Geneva, the United States government faced questions from civil society and the Human Rights Committee on the country’s compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In addition to questions on immigrants’ rights, racial discrimination, and more, US officials were pressed repeatedly on the state of abortion access in the wake of the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.

The June 2022 Supreme Court decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization eliminated federal constitutional protection for access to abortion in the United States. Following Dobbs, more than a dozen states fully banned abortion, and many others passed or proposed increased restrictions. On October 17-18, 2023, the Human Rights Committee will review US compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), including the impact of Dobbs on its human rights obligations.

Introduction Since the United States (US) was last reviewed by the Human Rights Committee (HRC) nearly a decade ago in 2014, there have been significant developments in the area of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) for women, girls, and people who can become pregnant living in the US, including the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision in June 2022. This decision overturned the constitutional right to abortion in the US after 50 years of precedent following the US Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade in 1973. Human rights experts warned before the Dobbs decision that overturning Roe would violate the rights of women, girls, and all people who can become pregnant in the US, as well as healthcare providers’ rights. Following the decision, the experts noted that whereas the restrictive new legal environment would not reduce the need for abortions, it would be guaranteed to increase the number of women and girls seeking clandestine and unsafe abortions, particularly for people of color and those living in poverty, and would fuel abortion stigma, leading to abuse of people in need of post-abortion care. They added: The decision to continue a pregnancy or terminate it must fundamentally and primarily be a woman’s decision as it will shape her whole future personal life and family life. The right of a woman to make autonomous decisions about her own body and reproductive functions is at the very core of her fundamental right to equality, non-discrimination, health, and privacy. As our submission details below, the restrictive environment around abortion in the US now also violates the rights to life and to be free of torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment (CIDT), as well as rights to free expression and movement, as guaranteed under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

On Friday, April 7, 2023, Texas-based U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk delivered his decision in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine et al v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration et al, ruling that mifepristone should be pulled from the market. On Wednesday, April 12, 2023, a three-judge panel for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals partly overruled Kacsmaryk’s decision, stating that the FDA’s approval of mifepristone remains valid while also ruling to reinstate medically unnecessary restrictions to accessing the medication.  This decision could result in a devastating, nationwide ban on mifepristone — even in states where abortion is legally protected — and compromise access to medication abortion across the country. USOW and our partners across the country are mobilizing behind a united message to our judiciary: reverse this harmful decision, respect science, and uphold the law. Read the full brief

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Last week, Representative Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA) reintroduced her Support UNFPA Funding Act, which ensures the United States contributes to the United Nations (UN) Population Fund. This fund is an agency within the UN that promotes gender equality, empowers women and girls, and provides life-saving resources to women globally. By working with partners in over 150 countries, the UNFPA provides access to sexual and reproductive health services to women around the world. Houlahan has been a staunch advocate in supporting this fund since joining Congress in 2019. She introduced this bill in the 116th and 117th Congress as it not only supports women and girls globally, but also promotes international stability. Read the full list of endorsing organizations

As organizations, groups and initiatives committed to the pursuit of human and civil rights, advocating for marginalized communities and defending racial and gender justice in the United States, we are proud to endorse the Freedom to Learn campaign and announce our participation in the Freedom To Learn National Day of Action on May 3, 2023. We join the growing, global network of more than 5,000 academics, authors and advocates who oppose the censoring of critical content in public and higher education. The Freedom To Learn Movement has grown in response to the College Board’s February 2023 decision to water down its new Advanced Placement African American Studies course curriculum. We stand united in the call to restore the teaching of critical frameworks like intersectionality and contemporary movements for Black lives to the AP course. But more than that, we recognize that this one decision is not isolated. It is part of a long history of Black erasure and an alarming, current political moment in which right-wing politicians are seeking to undermine democracy by limiting public access to history and ideas. Read the Full Letter

The undersigned organizations call on the Biden administration to update the United States’ fifth periodic report to the UN Human Rights Committee under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The Committee will be basing its review on this report, which was submitted by the Trump administration on January 15, 2021. This report version lacks updates on existing U.S. policies, as well as a commitment to expand protections for marginalized communities, especially non-citizens, in the context of reproductive health and access to medical care. It is critical — and consistent with the Biden administration’s policy commitments — to address the gaps between current U.S. policies and the ICCPR.

Executive Summary Following the United States (US) Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June 2022, people in the US who can become pregnant are facing an unprecedented human rights crisis. In Dobbs, the Supreme Court overturned the constitutionally protected right to access abortion, leaving the question of whether and how to regulate abortion to individual states. Approximately 22 million women and girls of reproductive age in the US now live in states where abortion access is heavily restricted, and often totally inaccessible. This briefing paper details the intensifying human rights emergency caused by the decision, and discusses the ways that Dobbs contravenes the US’ international human rights obligations. The consequences of the Dobbs decision are wide ranging. Restrictions on access to healthcare places women’s lives and health at risk, leading to increased maternal mortality and morbidity, a climate of fear among healthcare providers, and reduced access to all forms of care. Dobbs also enables penalization and criminalization of healthcare, with providers, patients, and third parties at risk of prosecution or civil suit for their involvement in private healthcare decisions. Relatedly, the decision opens the door to widespread infringement of privacy rights as digital surveillance is expanded to detect violations of new regulations. New bans also infringe on freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief, restricting the ability of physicians to counsel patients and clergy to provide pastoral care to their congregants. Finally, the harms of Dobbs violate principles of equality and non-discrimination; they fall disproportionately on marginalized populations including Black, indigenous, and people of color; people with disabilities; immigrants; and those living in poverty. By overturning the established constitutional protection for access to abortion and through the passage of restrictive state laws, the US is in violation of its obligations under international law, codified in a number of human rights treaties to which it is a party or a signatory. These human rights obligations include, but are not limited to, the rights to: life; health; privacy; liberty and security of person; to be free from torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; freedom of thought, conscience, and religion or belief; equality and non-discrimination; and to seek, receive, and impart information. A version of this briefing paper was submitted to UN special procedures mandate holders in March 2023. The submission, cosigned by nearly 200 human rights, reproductive justice, and other concerned groups and individuals, requested urgent action from the UN mandate holders to examine the situation, engage with civil society, and call on the US to uphold its international human rights obligations. Less than a year on from this catastrophic legal decision, it is now apparent that the consequences are even worse than feared. Women and girls in need of reproductive healthcare are being met with systematic refusals, onerous financial burdens, stigma, fear of violence, and criminalization. Thousands are being forced to remain pregnant against their will. Part II of this briefing paper outlines the consequences of Dobbs on the fundamental human rights of women and girls, as well as the disproportionate impact it has on certain demographics made vulnerable by systemic oppressions. This factual summary includes input from physicians in various states as part of fact-gathering efforts conducted by a number of organizations involved in this submission. Part III discusses the ways in which Dobbs contravenes the US’ international obligations. Part IV sets forth our Conclusion and Calls to Action.