The Oberlin Review
<< Front page News October 27, 2006

Off the Cuff: Louise Melling

 

Louise Melling, OC ’82, is the director of the Reproductive Freedom Project at the American Civil Liberties Union.  She came to Oberlin two weeks ago to give a lecture about the state of reproductive rights in the current political climate of the United States.

How did you decide to go into this line of work?

I knew I wanted to do something with women’s rights work when I was in college.  I went to Washington D.C. after graduation to work for the Center for Women and Policy Studies, [an organization that] provided assistance for victims of domestic violence cases.  From there on I wanted to go to law school to do work with women’s legal rights.

I came to the ACLU as a litigator. I really like suing states on the basis of constitutional rights. Really, there’s nothing more fun (laughs). As the director, now I do fundraising and manage the department.

In general, though, I can trace this desire [to go into work surrounding women’s issues] to growing up with a mother who was [a strong woman], the first in her family to go to college, had to work in the home because she had kids…I was around ten years old at the time when [Roe v. Wade made abortion] legal, when the pill started becoming available, when women’s rights activism was [prominent]. I remember [supporting] Angela Davis and protesting [an] eighth grade teacher for saying sexist things.


How do you find out about the cases ACLU lawyers ultimately take on?

We have affiliates in every state.  A lot of cases come along when states pass laws.  Staff members track and analyze legislation, and when it looks like a bad [piece of] legislation is likely to pass, we analyze whether or not there is a credible legal challenge.  If we think we can challenge, we find a client.  A client usually comes in the form of a doctor of a clinic, and we have relationships with doctors and clinics throughout the country.

Sometimes we get cases where the clients come to us.  We have two cases right now regarding prisoners’ access to abortions, and in both these cases the women contacted the ACLU. 

   

Is there any case you won that you are particularly proud of?

My very first case is my very favorite case.  I sued the state of Idaho, arguing that Idaho needed to pay for abortions through the Medicaid programs.  I represented a 13-year-old who wanted to terminate the pregnancy and was under Medicaid.  She agreed to be a plaintiff.  We asked the judge to give emergency funds to pay for the abortion because she couldn’t afford it.  The judge ultimately granted us relief so the state was ordered to pay for the abortion, and he also read a short statement indicating that he expected to rule that the Idaho state law was unconstitutional.  And also, this 13-year-old was fantastic.  Really articulate, gutsy.  It was incredibly courageous of her to be in this case.

My other [proud moment] came when Michigan passed its partial birth abortion ban, which was the first of many bans.  We filed a lawsuit to stop it.  You’re supposed to get assigned to a judge at random, and we got one who was clearly harsh, very probing in his questions and…very angry at us because we had filed the case too close to when the law would take effect.  But after the hearing, he issued a thoughtful and honest opinion about why the law was unconstitutional.


Have you had any cases that were particularly frustrating or disheartening?

Winning these cases is incredibly satisfying because we make real differences in real people’s lives.  So losing these cases is incredibly frustrating and sad, first because you’ve put in all this work, and second because you know they will affect and hurt so many people. I had a case in Tennessee where I challenged the parental consent law. The trial judges wrote these spectacular decisions, and I had great clients who spoke so well, and they gave you a real understanding [of the situation]. We went up to the court of appeals and lost.  I felt like I came so close to either having a chance to win or [at least] to delay enforcement [of the law].  I would have succeeded [if I had had] another six months.  Broader frustration is that the course has really changed.  Everyone focuses on the supreme courts, but the lower courts are where these decisions are really decided.  It’s hard to win federal courts.


What do you foresee as the future of reproductive rights in the United States?

I don’t foresee the courts overturning Roe any time in the near future.  But what I imagine is that we’ll just see for some time — I don’t know how long — more and more restrictions being upheld.  As you can well expect, the people who are going to be hurt first and foremost are poor women, young women, rural women — those who have fewer options in their lives.

As a person who is in the courts, people can’t keep looking to the courts as the way to protect their rights.  Nobody ever should.  Something must be said for the court of public opinion — I really do believe that the courts are only willing to stay a few steps ahead, but if public support is waning [on a given issue], that will be reflected in the courts.  You see it with the Democrats less willing to be steadfast on abortion rights.  A huge problem is that people aren’t willing to talk about abortion except in a few cases where it’s sympathetic, such as when it’s an instance of health, rape or incest.  If no one talks about it, it’s going to continue to be stigmatized.


 
 
   

Powered by