Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the country’s No. 1 abortion provider, applauded the House “for taking the necessary first steps to enshrine our right to contraception in addition to the critical actions they’ve taken to protect abortion access,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, the organization’s president.
Supporters of the Right to Contraception Act cited language in a concurring opinion by Associate Justice Clarence Thomas in pushing for passage of the proposal. A member of the 5-4 majority that overruled Roe, Thomas wrote in a separate opinion June 24 the high court “should reconsider” all precedents regarding “substantive due process.”
Among such precedents, Thomas mentioned Griswold v. Connecticut, a 1965 ruling that protected the right of married couples to use contraception. The Supreme Court extended that right to unmarried people in its 1972 Eisenstadt v. Baird decision.
Associate Justice Samuel Alito, however, said in the majority opinion the decision to overrule Roe does not call into question the justices’ rulings in other cases. “[W]e have stated unequivocally that ‘[n]othing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion,” he wrote. Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh reiterated that view in his own concurring opinion.
RELATED: BREAKING: Supreme Court Overturns Roe
In floor debate Thursday, Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., said some state legislators have followed the justices’ reversal of Roe and Thomas’ comments with efforts to ban specific contraceptives. “[W]hile the right to contraception is legal today, we must act to ensure this remains true in the future. This legislation does exactly that, by enshrining the right to contraception in federal law,” he said.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi charged Republicans “are against birth control, but they are for controlling women. This is about servitude.”
Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., said Republicans support access to contraceptives but the bill should be named the “Payouts for Planned Parenthood Act.”
“It would send more taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood, freeing up more funds for them to provide abortions and end vulnerable lives,” she said during floor debate. “It allows Planned Parenthood and abortion providers to prescribe both on- and off-label drugs to be used for abortions without any restrictions.”
Approval of the Right to Contraception Act followed House passage of at least three other bills in reaction to the Supreme Court’s opinion in Dobbs and/or Thomas’ concurrence:
RELATED: Conservative Christian Leaders Blast Democrats for Attempting to Codify Abortion Rights
— The Women’s Health Protection Act, which would surpass Roe by prohibiting federal and state regulations of the procedure that were permitted by the justices under the 1973 ruling, and the Ensuring Access to Abortion Act, which would forbid pro-life efforts to prohibit abortion tourism to other states and to block the mailing of abortion pills across state lines. The House approved the proposals in 219-210 and 223-205 votes July 15, respectively.
— The Respect for Marriage Act, which would repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act and require federal and state recognition of same-sex marriages considered legal in the jurisdiction where they took place. It gained House passage July 19 in a 267-157 vote.
RFRA, which was a legislative response to a 1990 Supreme Court decision that weakened religious freedom protections, passed without opposition in the House and by 97-3 in the Senate before President Clinton signed it into law. In recent years, however, many Democrats have begun to oppose RFRA’s application when it clashes with abortion or gay and transgender rights.
Under RFRA, the government may gain an exemption from the requirement that it not substantially burden the free exercise of religion if it can show it has a compelling interest and is using the “least restrictive means” to further that interest.
This article originally appeared at Baptist Press.
