Blog of Rights

Sarah
Lipton-Lubet

Sarah Lipton-Lubet is a policy counsel in the ACLU's Washington Legislative Office, where her work focuses on reproductive freedom and women’s rights. Sarah came to the ACLU from the Center for Reproductive Rights, and previously clerked for the Honorable Richard Paez of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, as well as the Honorable Nancy Gertner of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Sarah earned a J.D. from Yale Law School, where she was Symposium Editor of the Yale Law Journal, and a B.A. summa cum laude from Northwestern University in American Studies.

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next Page

Abortion Ban Plays Politics with Women’s Health

By Sarah Lipton-Lubet, ACLU Washington Legislative Office at 10:03am

The House Judiciary Committee has held eight anti-abortion or anti-family planning votes or hearings so far this Congress.  This morning, they’re scheduled to make it nine.  The Committee will be considering the so-called “District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” which would ban abortion in the District of Columbia at 20 weeks.   

History Is On Our Side: Why the Federal Contraception Rule is Constitutional

By Brigitte Amiri, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project & Sarah Lipton-Lubet, ACLU Washington Legislative Office & Anthony Rothert, Legal Director, ACLU of Eastern Missouri at 5:26pm

History has a way of repeating itself. Almost five decades ago a court in South Carolina considered a claim that a restaurant owner could refuse to serve African-American customers because integration of the races was against his religious beliefs. The court rejected that claim, and courts went on to do the same when faced with other, similar claims that religion can be used to discriminate. 

Another Abortion Ban? You’ve Got to be Kidding Me

By Sarah Lipton-Lubet, ACLU Washington Legislative Office at 1:20pm

Earlier this week, in a case brought by the ACLU, the ACLU of Arizona, and the Center for Reproductive Rights, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit struck down an extreme Arizona law that bans abortion care starting at 20 weeks. The court called it "per se unconstitutional." That's judicial-speak for "are you kidding me with this?"

And yet today, the U.S. House of Representatives held a hearing on a bill from Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) that would do the very same thing—except this one wouldn't be limited to Franks' home state of Arizona. Initially, Franks targeted the women of D.C., but has since announced his intention to expand his scope nationwide.

Religion Doesn’t Justify Discrimination: ACLU Files Brief in Third Contraception Rule Challenge

By Brigitte Amiri, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project & Sarah Lipton-Lubet, ACLU Washington Legislative Office & Michael J. Steinberg, Legal Director, ACLU of Michigan & Sarah Mehta, Fellow, Immigrants' Rights Project, ACLU at 12:33pm

Another private company – this one sells lawn and snow removal equipment in Michigan – is challenging the federal rule that requires employers to provide insurance coverage for contraception without a co-pay. As we’ve written before, these cases are meritless and harken back to a time that we should not repeat. For example, in 1966, the Piggie Park restaurant in South Carolina refused to serve African-Americans because integration was against the owners’ religious beliefs. The same argument was used to try to get around equal pay and labor protections. The courts did not allow religion to justify discrimination then, and they should not do so now.  

Another Contraception Challenge, Another Misguided Argument

By Brigitte Amiri, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project & Sarah Lipton-Lubet, ACLU Washington Legislative Office & Witold Walczak, Legal Director, ACLU of Pennsylvania at 4:14pm

As we’ve written before, history has a way of repeating itself. Private companies that are challenging the federal rule that requires employers to provide insurance coverage for contraception without a co-pay are also repeating their same, misguided argument that the rule violates their religious liberty. Yesterday the ACLU filed an amicus brief in the most recent case raising these arguments – this time in a case brought by a lumber company.

Court’s Ruling to Allow Employer to Discriminate Out of Step; Threatens Women’s Health

By Sarah Lipton-Lubet, ACLU Washington Legislative Office & Brigitte Amiri, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project at 4:30pm

A federal court in Colorado today put a temporary halt on the implementation of the Obama administration’s contraceptive coverage rule, with respect to one company. The contraceptive coverage rule requires insurance plans to cover contraception and stop routinely discriminating against women. The decision, if upheld, could pave the way for businesses to use their owners’ religion as an excuse to discriminate. 

What the Supreme Court’s Obamacare Decision Means for Birth Control Litigation

By Sarah Lipton-Lubet, ACLU Washington Legislative Office at 5:23pm

Last week, as the nation paid rapt attention, the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius.  The decision is especially critical for women, who are more likely to suffer gaps and discrimination in their health care coverage.  Importantly, it means that the contraceptive coverage rule – which ensures access to affordable birth control for millions of women across the country – is still in place.

Another Challenge to the Federal Contraception Rule, Another Friend-of-the-Court Brief

By Brigitte Amiri, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project & Sarah Lipton-Lubet, ACLU Washington Legislative Office at 2:26pm

There are now over 35 lawsuits challenging a federal rule that requires employers to provide insurance coverage for contraception without a co-pay.

A Victory for Women: Employer Can't Use Its Religion to Deny Birth Control Coverage for Its Employees

By Brigitte Amiri, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project & Sarah Lipton-Lubet, ACLU Washington Legislative Office & Anthony Rothert, Legal Director, ACLU of Eastern Missouri at 2:32pm

On Friday, a district court in Missouri rejected a case brought by a mining company challenging the federal birth control rule that requires employer health plans to cover contraception without a co-pay.  The Missouri case is one of 30 pending, and it is the first case to be dismissed on the merits.  It’s a tremendous victory for women, particularly those employed by the mining company. 

One Down and 23 to Go: Judge Tosses Baseless Challenge to Birth Control Coverage

By Sarah Lipton-Lubet, ACLU Washington Legislative Office & Brigitte Amiri, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project at 4:53pm

Tuesday, a Nebraska federal court rejected a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration’s rule requiring insurance plans to cover contraception. This was the first of two dozen challenges to be decided.   We applaud the court’s decision and hope that the judges in the other cases follow the Nebraska federal judge’s lead.

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next Page
Statistics image