Last week, four servicewomen who served our country in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with the Service Women鈥檚 Action Network, in federal court to challenge the combat exclusion policy. This policy prevents women from being assigned to most units that engage in direct ground combat.
Last week, four servicewomen who served our country in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with the Service Women鈥檚 Action Network, sued the Secretary of Defense in federal court to challenge the combat exclusion policy. This policy prevents women from being assigned to most units that engage in direct ground combat.
The policy has the effect of closing entire career fields to women, and closing about 238,000 individual positions to women across the armed services. The plaintiffs include two Marines, an Army soldier, and a combat pilot who has flown with the Air Force and the Air National Guard. Each of them has been harmed and limited by the combat exclusion policy. The policy prevents women from even competing for many positions, no matter how qualified or capable they are. For example, Major Mary Jennings Hegar, a successful combat pilot who won a Purple Heart and a Distinguished Flying Cross with Valor after being shot down and injured while successfully rescuing injured soldiers in Afghanistan, is barred from competing for Air Force combat and special ops positions that are closed to women.
The combat exclusion policy is outdated and doesn鈥檛 match the reality of modern warfare. Despite what the policy says on paper, women are already fighting alongside their male counterparts. Because of the policy, though, women often are not officially part of the all-male units they go on missions with. Commanders have to get around the policy by relying on legal fictions, using women troops in 鈥渢emporary鈥� teams that are 鈥渁ttached to鈥� or 鈥渋n direct support of鈥� all-male ground combat units.
This was the situation faced by plaintiffs Captain Zoe Bedell and First Lieutenant Colleen Farrell, two Marines who led Female Engagement Teams in Afghanistan. In this program, teams of women Marines went on missions with Marine infantrymen and regularly encountered ground combat. The women lived in the same combat outposts as the men, managing without showers and toilets and carrying the same gear. Yet their missions were sometimes interrupted or even cancelled when commanders became concerned that sending women into combat would violate the letter of the archaic combat exclusion policy. The gap between the policy, which was written in 1994, and the real practice in post-9/11 warfare, does a disservice to our servicewomen in combat, and it harms our military.
Women have been killed on the battlefield, and many more have been wounded in the course of their service. Take plaintiff Army Staff Sergeant Jennifer Hunt, who was awarded the Purple Heart, was wounded after serving in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. While women have an equal opportunity of being hurt or killed, the policy limits their ability to receive equal, integrated training and to advance in the ranks. Because their combat experience often is unofficial or outside of their official career field, it doesn鈥檛 count in the same way for promotions resulting in a 鈥渂rass ceiling鈥� that keeps our military leadership overwhelmingly male.
The Constitution forbids the government from imposing a blanket ban on women鈥檚 participation, especially where the rule is outdated and doesn鈥檛 accurately capture how war is being waged today. Now, after a decade of armed service abroad, our servicewomen are demanding the opportunity to compete for official assignment to the combat jobs they鈥檝e been doing for years.
Learn more about women in the military: Sign up for breaking news alerts, , and .
Learn More 老澳门开奖结果 the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseOct 2024
LGBTQ Rights
+2 Issues
At Supreme Court, Tennessee Seeks to Expand Reach of Dobbs to Ban Health Care for Transgender YouthAt Supreme Court, Tennessee Seeks to Expand Reach of Dobbs to Ban Health Care for Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON 鈥� In their brief defending the state鈥檚 ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti has asked the Supreme Court to expand its ruling overturning Roe v. Wade and allow the state to target transgender people鈥檚 autonomy over their own bodies, too. In U.S. v. Skrmetti, three Tennessee transgender youth and their families are challenging a state law that prohibits medical providers from prescribing medical treatments to transgender youth, such as puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapies, that are allowed for minors who are not transgender. Represented by the 老澳门开奖结果, the 老澳门开奖结果 of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, the families argue that the ban violates their Equal Protection rights under the 14th Amendment. In the brief filed today, Tennessee relies on the Supreme Court鈥檚 2022 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Whole Women鈥檚 Health in an attempt to justify its ban on gender-affirming health care for transgender people. The brief cites to Dobbs at least 10 times in sweeping arguments to justify government sex discrimination. 鈥淲e鈥檝e seen just how far extreme politicians will push to deny us our reproductive freedom, from banning abortion to threatening IVF to even threatening to put doctors in jail for providing emergency care, with deadly consequences for women鈥檚 lives,鈥� said Jennifer Dalven, director of the 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 Reproductive Freedom Project. 鈥淭he same politicians who are trying to control women have now set their sights on transgender people and their families and are trying to control their bodies and lives. Allowing politicians to continue down this road could hold severe implications for the freedom of all people to decide what is right for their own body.鈥� Tennessee claims that their ban on gender-affirming care does not discriminate on the basis of sex even though it bans minors of one sex from accessing health care it allows to members of another sex. A transgender girl is barred from taking doctor-prescribed estrogen because Tennessee considers it 鈥渋nconsistent鈥� with her birth-assigned sex of male but a cisgender girl with a birth-assigned sex of female is permitted to take estrogen for any purpose including to affirm her female gender identity. 鈥淪ince this Project鈥檚 founding by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, we have adamantly challenged efforts to limit who we can be based on our gender or ability to bear children,鈥� said Ria Tabacco Mar, director of the 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 Women鈥檚 Rights Project. 鈥淭ennessee鈥檚 attempt to limit who young people can become based on their sex shares a through-line with our nation鈥檚 history of subjugating women in the name of biology. The fight for each of us to live fully and authentically must include trans people. There is no 鈥榯ransgender鈥� exception to the U.S. Constitution.鈥� In April 2023, the 老澳门开奖结果, the 老澳门开奖结果 of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP sued the state of Tennessee to block S.B. 1, which prohibits medical providers from prescribing medical treatments to transgender youth, such as puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapies, that it exempts for minors who are not transgender. Following a decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, S.B. 1 took effect in July 2023. Since 2021, 24 states have banned hormone therapies for transgender youth. 鈥淟aws like Tennessee鈥檚 are not benign regulations of medical care; they are discriminatory efforts to exclude transgender people from the protections of the Constitution,鈥� said Chase Strangio, co-director of the 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 LGBTQ & HIV Project. 鈥淭hese bans represent a dangerous and discriminatory affront to the well-being of transgender youth across the country and their constitutional right to equal protection under the law.鈥� -
Press ReleaseSep 2024
Women's Rights
Civil Rights Groups Tell Federal Appeals Court that Protections for Pregnant Workers Cover Abortion Care 聽Civil Rights Groups Tell Federal Appeals Court that Protections for Pregnant Workers Cover Abortion Care 聽
WASHINGTON, D.C. - On Friday, a broad coalition of labor, workers鈥� rights, and gender justice organizations 鈥� led by the 老澳门开奖结果 (老澳门开奖结果), the 老澳门开奖结果 of Arkansas, and the National Women鈥檚 Law Center (NWLC) 鈥� filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in support of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission鈥檚 (EEOC) regulations implementing the landmark Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), including the regulations鈥� explicit protection for workers who have abortions. The PWFA, which took effect last year, was the culmination of a decade-long campaign to secure access to reasonable accommodations for workers with temporary limitations caused by 鈥減regnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions.鈥� The EEOC鈥檚 regulations provide comprehensive guidance to workers, employers, and the courts about the statute鈥檚 range of protections, including job-protected time off for medical treatment and recovery. The amicus brief filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit supports the EEOC in a challenge by 17 red states that are trying to block the PWFA regulations鈥� coverage of accommodations for abortion-related care. In June, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas dismissed the states鈥� challenge, and the states appealed to the Eighth Circuit. Their appeal includes a request that the Eighth Circuit issue a preliminary injunction of the regulations鈥� abortion provisions. The 老澳门开奖结果-NWLC brief details the federal law鈥檚 longstanding ban on discrimination against workers who obtain abortions 鈥� protection the PWFA intended to continue. The brief also documents the accounts of workers whose health and jobs were put at risk when their employers denied them accommodations, including time off, for abortion care. Such accounts illustrate the urgent need for clarity with respect to the PWFA鈥檚 coverage of abortion-related accommodations, and the devastating medical and financial consequences if such accommodations are denied. 鈥淎bortion has long been recognized as part of the full spectrum of workers鈥� pregnancy-related needs that are protected by the law, 鈥� said Gillian Thomas, senior staff attorney at the 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 Women's Rights Project. 鈥淭he states鈥� challenge has created uncertainty, and seeks to deprive workers of essential, job-protected time off for abortion care, posing significant health risks and leading to forced pregnancies. The EEOC regulations are vital to ensure pregnant workers don't have to choose between their health and their jobs.鈥� 鈥淓xtremist politicians are demonstrating repeatedly their willingness to risk women鈥檚 health to advance their anti-abortion agenda,鈥� said Gaylynn Burroughs, vice president for Education and Workplace Justice at the National Women鈥檚 Law Center (NWLC). 鈥淟et鈥檚 be clear: abortion care is pregnancy-related care, and stripping essential protections for abortion from the PWFA would endanger the health and economic security of pregnant workers.鈥� 鈥淭he Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and its regulations provide a lifeline for workers who need accommodations during the most critical periods of their lives. Attempting to strip away these protections, particularly for abortion-related needs, is an affront to the rights and well-being of pregnant workers,鈥� said John Williams, legal director of the 老澳门开奖结果 of Arkansas. 鈥淎ll people in all aspects of pregnancy, including abortion, should be treated with the care and consideration they deserve. We stand firmly with the EEOC in defending these essential protections.鈥� A copy of the brief can be found here. -
PodcastSep 2024
Women's Rights
How Sue Bird Is Supercharging Women's SportsHow Sue Bird Is Supercharging Women's Sports
-
Press ReleaseJul 2024
Women's Rights
LGBTQ Rights
老澳门开奖结果 Condemns House Measure Against Department of Education Title IX Rule老澳门开奖结果 Condemns House Measure Against Department of Education Title IX Rule
WASHINGTON 鈥� Today, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to pass H.J. Res. 165, a Congressional Review Act resolution disapproving of the U.S. Department of Education鈥檚 final Title IX rule providing guidance to schools on protecting students from sexual harassment, pregnancy discrimination, anti-LGBTQ discrimination, and other forms of sex discrimination. Mike Zamore, 老澳门开奖结果 National Policy and Government Affairs Director, had the following response: 鈥淭oday鈥檚 vote to completely repeal the Title IX rule takes a sledgehammer to the government鈥檚 ability to ensure that all students have the opportunity to learn free from sex discrimination and harassment. Stripping critical civil rights protections from LGBTQ students and students who are pregnant and parenting - as this resolution would do - is something that all members of Congress should strongly oppose. This is also not how Congress should act to protect the rights of students who face disciplinary action under Title IX because passing this resolution would prevent future rulemaking to ensure fair processes in school disciplinary proceedings.鈥� The 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 letter urging a 鈥淣o鈥� vote on H.J. Res. 165 can be found here: /documents/aclu-urges-no-vote-on-h-j-res-165 The 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 statement on the final Title IX rule can be found here: /press-releases/155090