HHS Accountability Project publication

We applaud Virginia’s concrete action to respect parental rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and laws of Virginia and to ensure privacy, dignity, and respect for all students in Virginia schools.

Legal challenges to the IFR are possible, including on the grounds that the IFR exceeds the VA’s statutory authority and there is no “good cause” to issue an IFR and short-circuit the normal rulemaking process.

The VA’s claim that abortion under the IFR is ‘needed’ and ‘medically necessary and appropriate’ is arbitrary and capricious. Abortion is not healthcare, abortion harms women, and women do not need abortion to succeed.

“Do not plant your vineyard with two types of seed; if you do, the entire harvest will be defiled — both the crop you plant and the fruit of your vineyard” — Deuteronomy 22:9

Surreal progressive colleges, universities, and athletic organizations want to ignore biology and encourage the Kafkaesque.

It will be the height of arbitrariness and capriciousness to finalize such a dangerous rule in the face of these and the many other grave harms identified in this comment when they are not only not mandated by Congress, but go against the very statute the Proposed Rule purports to enforce.

Without intervention by the Court, Hardison will continue to effectively nullify the vital religious protections guaranteed by Title VII.

Corporations’ abortion travel benefits may constitute pregnancy discrimination and disability discrimination.

On September 12, EPPC Fellow Rachel N. Morrison and Kate O’Beirne Senior Fellow Mary Rice Hasson submitted a public comment opposing a proposed rule…

In accord with the Biden administration’s “health equity” and gender identity policy priorities, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) proposed new nondiscrimination regulations under Section 1557 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act .

HS is using a nondiscrimination law to push a medical standard of care.

Despite broad protections for faith-based contractors in law, the proposal would limit which contractors can qualify for religious exemption and would prohibit faith-based contractors from making employment decisions based on sincere religious beliefs and tenets.