The recent Supreme Court ruling that upheld a Trump administration regulation allowing employers and health insurers to opt-out of contraception coverage has energized the abortion rights movement, leaders say, even though it does not affect strong abortion-access laws in states including New York, which last year adopted the Reproductive Health Act.
“We know that people have been paying attention to what the Trump administration has been doing, in terms of rolling back access to reproductive health care,” National Institute for Reproductive Health President Andrea Miller said. “I think you’re already starting to see it manifest in the [2018 mid-term and presidential primary] election results. We expect that it will be an important part of the consideration that voters have when they go to the polls in November.”
Miller said support for reproductive health care in New York has grown as the Trump administration has threatened abortion and contraception accessibility by attempting to dismantle protections in the Affordable Care Act and nominating anti-abortion judges to the Supreme Court.
The July Supreme Court ruling, which allows employers with religious objections to be exempt from providing health care insurance that includes contraception coverage, is the latest example of decisions that energize the abortion rights movement in New York rather than demoralize it, she said.
“The issue of reproductive health rights, particularly access to abortion, was really hot on the agenda, and it was a really big part of the reason that the state Senate flipped [from Republican control to a Democratic majority],” Miller said. “Then in early 2019, the RHA passed. That would never have happened had it not been clear that voters, increasingly younger voters, were turning out in greater numbers and driving the concern.”
The Reproductive Health Act, along with the Comprehensive Contraception Coverage Act and the “Boss Bill,” emphasizes women’s right to access abortion, receive contraception coverage and provides protections to New Yorkers from federal intrusion.”
Anti-abortion groups also say they are strengthened by this ruling. The Catholic Bishops of New York state said the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate was “an intrusion into the religious liberty rights” of all religious employers who were “focused to pay for something contrary to their ethical and religious beliefs.”
“We are grateful for the current administration’s efforts to protect religious freedom and to exempt religious organizations from the contraceptive mandate,” Kathleen Gallagher, director of Pro-Life Activities for the New York State Catholic Conference, said in an email. “At the same time, we hold grave concerns with regard to other ways in which the current administration is attempting to undo and wipe away essential parts of the Affordable Care Act, which will leave more American uninsured and without access to basic health care.”
But the Affordable Care Act and state laws don’t leave enough room for religious freedom, religious groups say. Vincent Bonventre, a law professor at Albany Law School, thinks women are entitled to the right to choose. However, he also believes it is an organization’s right to sustain their religious freedom by not offering abortion insurance coverage.
While the anti-abortion versus abortion-rights debate seems clear-cut, Miller suggests the values can co-exist through thoughtful laws and insurance policies.
“It is possible to create narrowly tailored exemptions that protect conscience that also ensure you are not barring or undermining access to care,” Miller said. “I think it really does a disservice to religious communities to assume you can’t hold both religious views and a belief in people’s right and ability to make decisions that are best for themselves and their families around reproduction.”
Other religious organizations, including the Religious Coalition For Reproductive Choice, agree with Miller and contend the Supreme Court’s ruling is immoral as it prioritizes the religious freedoms of the employer and neglects those of the employee.
“[The upholding] is an imposition of one set of religious views on masses of individuals,” said Rev. Cari Jackson, who is the coalition’s director of spiritual care and activism. “Corporations should be required to provide, as part of their insurance package, reproductive health care benefits.”
Jackson thinks both contraception and abortion should be covered by employers because “privacy of conscience supersedes all other encyclicals” in Catholicism. She also compared the current conflict to a belief by “theological Christian nationalists” that same-sex marriage “was an infringement on their religious freedom.”
In 2017, the latest year for which numbers are available, approximately 105,380 women received abortions in New York, according to the Guttmacher Institute. The research center also estimated 8% of women in the state do not have abortion clinics in their counties. Organizations like NIRH Pro-Choice America say that number indicates they still have work to do.
“There are still barriers and disparities when it comes to geographic access and there are issues with some insures who still don’t cover these services, and that’s why some people fall through the cracks,” Miller said. “We need to address where services are available and if there are opportunities to make services available through other means, like telemedicine.”
While advocacy groups rely on creativity to offer more solutions, Miller said the best way the public can continue their support is by voting.
Published in conjunction with 