Women's Rights and LGBQT Rights by Caroline Harris https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7 Laws and Supreme Court Cases en-us 2017-10-31 17:54:46 UTC 2017-10-31 19:08:54 UTC hello@padlet.com Title IX (9) of Education Act 1972 https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289176 - federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in any federally funded education program/activity.
- principal purpose is to avoid the use of federal money to support sex discrimination in education programs and provide citizens effective protection against those practices. 
- areas where discrimination may occur: recruitment, admissions, counseling, financial assistance, athletics, discipline, & employment. - title IX- NCAA ]]> 2017-10-31 18:40:35 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289176 Equal Pay Act 1963 miaburcher18 https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289619 -"Prohibits sex-based wage discrimination between men and women in the same establishment who perform jobs that require equal skill, effort, and responsibility under similar working conditions"
-Approved June 10, 1963
-aimed to close the wage gap ]]> 2017-10-31 18:41:38 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289619 Mueller v. Oregon https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289777 An Oregon factory enacted a law that restrained women to working for 10 years. The women argued that labor at the factory had no effect on their health and the company just wanted to restrain their fiscal revenue. The court ruled that women were in fact unhealthy working more than 10 hours and therefore stated that the Oregon factory was just. ]]> 2017-10-31 18:42:05 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289777 Roe v. Wade https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289883 - Texas law prohibited abortions except to save the pregnant woman's life.  
- The Court ruled that a woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy protected under the 14th Amendment. The decision gave a woman total autonomy over the pregnancy during the first trimester and defined different levels of state interest for the 2nd and 3rd trimesters. 46 states were affected by the Court's ruling. ]]> 2017-10-31 18:42:20 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289883 Griswold V. Connecticut (1965) sophiapappas18 https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289960 -the supreme court ruled that a state's ban on the use of contraceptives violated the right to marital privacy. 
-the 1879 law provided that "any person who uses any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception shall be fined not less than 40 dollars or imprisoned not less than 60 days.
-through the Constitution does not explicitly protect a general right to privacy, the various guarantees within the Bill of Rights create penumbras, or zones, that establish a right to privacy. 
-1st, 3rd, 4th, and 9th amendments, create a new constitutional right, right to privacy in marital relations 
- the majority in Griswold v. Connecticut agreed that the "right to privacy," in addition to being fundamental was substantive. ]]> 2017-10-31 18:42:32 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289960 Planned Parenthood vs. Casey https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289987 This was in response to Roe c. Wade and changed the law so that it required informed consent and a 24 hour waiting period prior to the procedure. A minor seeking an abortion required the consent of one parent. ]]> 2017-10-31 18:42:35 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202289987 Gonzales vs. Carhart https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290047 They found that it was constitutional to ban partial-birth abortions, it did not conflict with equal protection.]]> 2017-10-31 18:42:45 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290047 Loving v Virginia https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290194 "the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State."]]> 2017-10-31 18:43:06 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290194 Defense of Marriage Act (1996) https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290243 permitted states to disregard same-sex marriages even if they were legal elsewhere in the United States

In 2013, the Supreme Court struck this down because it is discriminating against those in same-sex marriages]]> 2017-10-31 18:43:13 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290243 Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290340 Civil rights case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples]]> 2017-10-31 18:43:29 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290340 Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt - 2016 https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290498 Should a court's "substantial burden" analysis take into account the extent to which laws that restrict access to abortion services actually serve the government's stated interest in promoting health?

Conclusion: HB2 imposes an undue burden on women seeking a legal abortion, and thus is unconstitutional.

]]> 2017-10-31 18:43:55 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290498 Lawrence v. Texas (2003) https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290909 Making same-sex sexual activity legal in every U.S. state and territory]]> 2017-10-31 18:44:56 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202290909 Title VII of theCivil Rights Act of 1964 https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202291470 Federal law prohibiting employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin, or religion. This is also applied to the federal government, state government, local government, private and public colleges and universities. ]]> 2017-10-31 18:46:12 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202291470 Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) elizabethpatt https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202293494 The state of Missouri attempted to pass a law that restricted abortions and using state funds towards Abortions. (It did not allow ‘public employees or public facilities” to participate in abortions unless it was to save the mothers life) The Supreme Court said that it was ok for states to choose to not use  the state funds for abortions and non of the provisions were unconstitutional. ]]> 2017-10-31 18:51:03 UTC https://padlet.com/charris60/sl4c9h4t23k7/wish/202293494