American Civil Liberties Union

In which state did doctors try to force a pregnant woman to have a c-section against her wishes?

What group can no longer be held in solitary confinement in Mississippi?

How many cells compose a person according to Personhood USA's definition?

How many states oppose a national ID card?

Which federal agency illegally gathers intelligence on innocent American Muslims?

Your Body, Your Decisions — This Means You, Moms!
Recently, a mother in South Carolina reached out to the ACLU for help. She was pregnant, and although she had had two prior cesarean surgeries, she wished to attempt a "trial of labor," that is, to give birth naturally, rather than having a scheduled cesarean surgery. The mother's wish made sense in light of her medical history, and according to professional standards set by obstetricians.

Some employers are asking job applicants for their passwords to which social networking site?

Which court ruled that a law that protects pregnant workers is unenforceable?

Which country is the only one in the world that sentences children to life without parole?

What government agency continues to defend warrantless wiretapping?

How could a shooter claim self-defense after killing an unarmed teenager in Florida?

This week, the Supreme Court ruled, by the all-too-familiar 5-4 margin, that a provision of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) giving workers time off to care for their own serious health conditions — including pregnancy and childbirth — can't be enforced by state employees in damages lawsuits against their public employers. The decision in Coleman v. Court of Appeals of Maryland effectively stripped many public employees — the majority of whom are women — of the right to job protection when they need to take time off while pregnant. The ACLU had joined an amicus brief arguing that the law was written in a gender-neutral way to provide women workers with the time they needed to go through childbirth and pregnancy-related complications, while ensuring that employers wouldn't discriminate based on the assumption that only women will need to take health-related leave from their jobs. While no opinion garnered five votes, a majority of the Court agreed that the law was not justified as a remedy for a pattern of unconstitutional discrimination against women or pregnant workers.