Despite Decades of Precedent, Court Backs Parents on Teen Contraceptives
"The Fifth Circuit decision contradicts federal law and is the latest high-profile decision relating to birth control access since the disastrous (Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health) decision," Democracy Forward Foundation said.
March 13, 2024 at 03:19 PM
5 minute read
Health CareThe original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
What You Need to Know
- Texas parents have a right of notice and consent before their daughter gets contraceptives from Title X grantees, an federal appeals court ruled.
- The Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court judgment that a federal regulation violates Texas law.
- However, the court reversed the district court and left in place language shielding grantee staff from having to notify parents.
In an opinion that clashes with 41 years of precedent, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that Title X of the Public Health Service Act, as administered, violates a parent's right under Texas law to be notified before contraceptives are given to a child.
Legal council for a group of anti-abortion nonprofit organizations, responding on background, said the effect of the opinion cannot be predicted because the decision is unclear. This was a reference to a partial reversal from the court that leaves in place Title X language that shields the staff of Title X grantees from notifying a parent or guardian.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSouth Carolina Physicians Challenge Abortion Ban Under Religious Freedom Claims
'Self-Diagnosed Nickel Allergy' Fails to Find Success in Med-Mal Suit, 8th Circuit Rules
5 minute readBreast Cancer Patient's Negligence Claims Cleared to Proceed Against Recalled BioZorb Marker
5 minute readHigh-Low Settlement Agreement 'Does Not Alone Establish Bias:' State High Court Affirms $20M Med Mal Verdict
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1First Department Attorneys Facing Possible Suspension for Failing to Register
- 22024 Marked Growth On Top of Growth for Law Firm Litigation Practices. Is a Cooldown in the Offing for 2025?
- 3Foreclosure: Judicial Estoppel and a Grand Irony
- 4Antitrust Law Continues Its Turn in the Spotlight
- 5Real Property Lawyers Need New Tools
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250