Use our account feature to register for a free CLI account. Your new account will allow you to bookmark and organize articles and research for easy reference later - making it simple to keep track of the research that's important to you!
Register / Sign in
close-panel

Charlotte Lozier Institute

Phone: 202-223-8073
Fax: 571-312-0544

2776 S. Arlington Mill Dr.
#803
Arlington, VA 22206

Get Notifications

Sign up to receive email updates from Charlotte Lozier Institute.

Become A Defender of Life

Your donation helps us continue to provide world-class research in defense of life.

DONATE

Charlotte Lozier Institute

Phone: 202-223-8073
Fax: 571-312-0544

2776 S. Arlington Mill Dr.
#803
Arlington, VA 22206

Life & the Law

Life & the Law

362 results

Filter Results By

Filter Applied. Clear All
Reset All Filters
362 results
Life & the Law

Written Testimony of Dr. Ingrid Skop on Interstate Travel for Abortion

On June 12, CLI VP of Medical Affairs Dr. Ingrid Skop testified on the issue of interstate travel for abortion before the Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Dr. Skop responded to a number of misconceptions about the alleged need for women to travel out of state for abortion.

charlotte-lozier-institute Charlotte Lozier Institute
June 18, 2024
ClosePlease login
featured-image
Life & the Law

United Kingdom Data Deficiencies Influencing U.S. FDA Decisions

CLI's VP of Medical Affairs Ingrid Skop, together with Calum Miller, MD, and Kevin Duffy, MPH, recently published an article in Issues in Law & Medicine arguing that decisions by the FDA to pull back regulations on the abortion drug mifepristone in part relied on "flawed studies with significantly undercounted complications" from the U.K.

Life & the Law

Misleading Statements About “Life of the Mother” Exceptions in Pro-life Laws Require Correction

Recently CLI scholars Ingrid Skop, M.D. and Mary Harned, J.D. published a rebuttal in Issues in Law & Medicine to a series of misleading statements made in an article that appeared in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology.

Life & the Law

Gestational Limits on Abortion in the United States Compared to International Norms (April 2024)

This report compares gestational limits on abortion in the U.S. with limits in other countries and serves as an update to CLI's original 2014 study. Of 193 U.N. countries, the U.S. is one of eight countries that allows, at the federal level, abortion on demand without any gestational limits. The U.S. is also one of only 15 countries in the U.N. that permit abortion on demand past 15 weeks of gestation, meaning its abortion law is far more permissive than the vast majority of the world.

Life & the Law

A Fact-Free Campaign Against Parents and Unborn Children in Alabama

Recently, Alabama passed a new law that grants immunity from both civil and criminal liability to IVF clinics for destroying human embryos, without parents’ consent and for any reason. This came in the wake of the Alabama supreme court ruling that parents can file suit when, without their consent and against their interests, a medical facility causes the death one or more of their frozen embryos. In this On Point, Richard Doerflinger clarifies the facts of the case and Alabama law, as well as countering misinformation.

Life & the Law

Filed: CLI Amicus Brief in Idaho’s Moyle v. United States EMTALA Case

CLI recently filed an amicus brief in the case Moyle v. United States (consolidated with Idaho v. U.S.) to be considered before the Supreme Court this April. The Biden administration has interpreted the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act in a way that would compel emergency room doctors to perform abortions even when a mother’s life is not in danger. According to CLI, such an interpretation of EMTALA is incoherent and in conflict with the plain sense of the text.

Life & the Law

Filed: CLI Amicus Brief in SCOTUS Case FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

On March 26, SCOTUS will hear oral arguments in the case FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. In the case, AHM argues that the FDA's changes to regulations of the abortion drug mifepristone were "arbitrary and capricious." CLI filed a brief in support of AHM, arguing that abortion with mifepristone is not "safe," that the FDA's loosening of mifepristone regulations makes these safety concerns even worse, and that AHM et al. have standing, since they would suffer concrete injury under the current loosened mifepristone regulations, being at risk of finding themselves complicit in abortion procedures.

featured-image
Life & the Law

Filed Brief: Zurawski v. Texas and Reasonable Medical Judgment

In February 2024, CLI filed a joint amicus brief with the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine supporting Texas in the case Zurawski v. State of Texas. The state’s abortion law is challenged on the grounds that its medical emergency exception is unduly vague, leaving physicians confused and unable to properly intervene to help pregnant women. Texas and CLI/AHM, however, argue that the “reasonable medical judgment” standard for when doctors are justified in intervening to save a mother’s life or major bodily function is both legally and medically sound. CLI and AHM agree with Texas, and expand on why their position is justified in this brief submitted to the court.

Become A Defender of Life

Your donation helps us continue to provide
world-class research in defense of life.

BECOME A PARTNER
cta-image