The Corner

Law & the Courts

The Equality Act Could Mandate Abortion Funding

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D, Calif.) speaks about the introduction of the Equality Act at the Capitol building in Washington, D.C., March 13, 2019. (Leah Millis/Reuters)

Aside from its other harmful elements, the Equality Act that passed the House today amends the 1964 Civil Rights Act and contains redefinitions of key terms that will likely be used to expand abortion rights. As some of the bill’s own advocates admit, the Equality Act could be read to mandate taxpayer funding for abortions and to nullify conscience protections for medical providers who object to performing abortion procedures.

The Equality Act defines “sex” to include “pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition,” and, as Representative Chris Smith (R., N.J.) explained on the House floor today, the term “related medical condition” in fact means “abortion.” From Smith’s remarks:

In the case Doe v. C.A.R.S., the Third Circuit stated, “We now hold that the term ‘related medical conditions’ includes an abortion.” Furthermore, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which enforces Title VII, interprets abortion to be covered as a “related medical condition.”

The bill also stipulates that those with “a related medical condition shall not receive less favorable treatment than other physical conditions,” a provision that would disallow physicians from refusing to perform an abortion.

The National Partnership for Women & Families, which promotes expansive abortion access, explains that under the Equality Act, women “would also be able to challenge denials of reproductive health care,” and the bill specifically neglects to offer conscience protections for those with objections.

The Equality Act’s provisions related to health-care funding, meanwhile, could be interpreted to undercut existing prohibitions on direct federal funding for abortion. Because the federal government funds health care — and because of the expansive way that the bill defines “establishment” as not limited to physical health-care facilities — it qualifies as a health-care provider, and therefore would itself be subject to the terms of the Equality Act. As a result, the government likely would be required to cover abortions procedures.

Because states receive federal funding to underwrite their own health-care programs, the Equality Act could also require those state governments to cover abortion procedures with their own funds, a change from longstanding practice that has protected state governments from having to do so.

Most Popular


The Age of Miscalculation

On August 7, 1998, more than 200 people were killed in terrorist attacks on U.S. embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. Americans learned three names most of them never had heard before: Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden, and al-Qaeda. On August 20, 1998, President Bill Clinton ordered a ... Read More

Jay-Z Joins the Ranks of the Insufficiently Woke

Rapper and mogul Jay-Z announced his company’s new partnership with the National Football League and has made much of the social-justice Left furious: I think that we forget that Colin [Kaepernick]’s whole thing was to bring attention to social injustice, correct? So, in that case, this is a success; this is ... Read More

‘Good Verse, Bad Verse, and Chaos’

I love reading Sarah Ruden, and I’ve enjoyed the attention given to Walt Whitman in these pages over the last few days. Ruden gives the poet the back of her hand for being championed by — angels and ministers of grace, defend us! — intellectuals and professors, a poet “whom ordinary Americans most ... Read More