Menu
Log in
Legislative & Reproductive Rights Committee | Queen's Bench Bar Association
Standing Committee

Legislative & Reproductive Rights Committee

We read the bills, and we tell Sacramento where Queen's Bench stands.

How we work
Meets as needed, heaviest during the legislative session
Open to
Every member

Our charge

From the bylaws

It shall be the duty of the Legislative Committee to study and report to the Board of Directors and to the members on legislative matters and to insure the communication of the position of the organization to the appropriate legislative body following recommendation to and approval by the Board, which are deemed by it to be of special interest to this organization or its members. Bylaws, Article VI, Section D.10 · Restated 2024

In practice

Bills move fast and most of them move unnoticed. We read what is in front of the Legislature, work out what it would mean for our members and for the women they represent, and bring the Board a recommendation while there is still time to matter.

When the Board adopts a position, we are the ones who communicate it to the legislative body. The reproductive rights portfolio sits with this committee, and it has not been quiet work in recent years.

What we do

  • Track legislation of special interest to Queen's Bench and its members.
  • Read every bill twice: once for the legal rule it makes, once for who will be able to use it.
  • Report to the Board and the membership on what is moving and why it matters.
  • Recommend positions for the Board to adopt.
  • Communicate Board-approved positions to the appropriate legislative body.
  • Keep the membership current on reproductive rights law as it changes.

How we read a bill

A bill can be perfectly drafted, survive every constitutional challenge, and still leave most of the people it names no better off. That gap is the thing this committee watches for. We read legislation twice: once for what it permits and forbids, and once for who will actually be able to use it.

The vocabulary for the second reading comes from outside the association. In June 1994, ahead of the International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo, a caucus of Black women meeting in Chicago named themselves Women of African Descent for Reproductive Justice and coined the term, joining reproductive rights to social justice and grounding both in international human rights rather than in privacy. SisterSong, the collective that carries the framework today, defines reproductive justice as the human right to maintain personal bodily autonomy, to have children, to not have children, and to parent the children one has in safe and sustainable communities.

Framework one

Reproductive health

Service delivery. Whether the care exists, whether it is competent, and whether anyone is providing it within reach.

Framework two

Reproductive rights

The legal regime. What the law permits, forbids, and protects, and who can be sued or prosecuted. This is the lawyer's home ground.

Framework three

Reproductive justice

Movement building and human rights. Whether the conditions exist for a person to exercise the right the second framework grants her.

That three-part division is not our invention. Asian Communities for Reproductive Justice, now Forward Together, set it out in 2005 and argued that the three work in tandem: none of them alone ends reproductive oppression. The point for a legislative committee is that a bill can score well on one framework and badly on another, and that a rights analysis conducted alone will not tell you so.

What the second reading asks

Who is the person this bill imagines? What does it cost, in money, time, travel, and risk, for someone outside that picture to use it? Does it create a right, or the conditions to exercise one? What enforcement mechanism does it build, and whom will that mechanism reach first?

These are the questions behind our reports to the Board. They are also, more often than not, the questions that surface the amendment worth asking for. A funding line, a venue provision, a confidentiality clause, or a fee waiver frequently does more for access than the operative right itself.

Scroll each column. Links open free full text where it exists

Where the framework comes from
  • Asian Communities for Reproductive Justice, A New Vision for Advancing Our Movement for Reproductive Health, Reproductive Rights and Reproductive Justice (2005). Full text The source of the three-framework taxonomy above. Short, and the single most useful thing on this list for a lawyer reading a bill.
  • SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, Reproductive Justice. Full text The definition in the collective's own words, and the shortest thing on this page.
  • Loretta J. Ross & Rickie Solinger, Reproductive Justice: An Introduction (Univ. of Cal. Press 2017). Author's page The standard book-length treatment, from one of the framework's originators.
  • Loretta J. Ross, Reproductive Justice as Intersectional Feminist Activism, 19 Souls 286 (2017). DOI
  • Zakiya Luna & Kristin Luker, Reproductive Justice, 9 Ann. Rev. L. & Soc. Sci. 327 (2013). Abstract Written for a law and social science audience. The clearest short account of how the rights movement and the justice movement diverged, and of the limits of law as a vehicle.
  • Dorothy E. Roberts, Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction, and the Meaning of Liberty (1997). The critique of choice as a frame, and the historical account most often cited in the legal literature that follows. Print only.
  • Jael Silliman, Marlene Gerber Fried, Loretta Ross & Elena R. Gutiérrez, Undivided Rights: Women of Color Organize for Reproductive Justice (2004). Print only.
  • Radical Reproductive Justice: Foundation, Theory, Practice, Critique (Loretta J. Ross, Lynn Roberts, Erika Derkas, Whitney Peoples & Pamela Bridgewater Toure eds., 2017). Print only.
How lawyers apply it
  • Cynthia Soohoo, Reproductive Justice and Transformative Constitutionalism, 42 Cardozo L. Rev., issue 3 (2021). Full text Traces how U.S. law codified reproductive oppression and asks what a constitutional order built to prevent it would look like. Closes with strategies available under the scheme we actually have.
  • Reva B. Siegel, Reasoning from the Body: A Historical Perspective on Abortion Regulation and Questions of Equal Protection, 44 Stan. L. Rev. 261 (1992). Full text Reads nineteenth-century criminal abortion statutes for the purposes their drafters stated. A model of what historical evidence about a statute's origins can do to arguments about its meaning.
  • Khiara M. Bridges, Race, Pregnancy, and the Opioid Epidemic: White Privilege and the Criminalization of Opioid Use During Pregnancy, 133 Harv. L. Rev. 770 (2020). Full text The closest thing on this list to a statutory analysis. Facially neutral child endangerment and assault statutes, and how prosecutorial construction of them tracked race rather than text.
  • Jill C. Morrison, What Lawyers Need to Know About the Reproductive Justice Framework, in Whose Choice Is It?: Abortion, Medicine, and the Law 309 (David F. Walbert & J. Douglas Butler eds., ABA 7th ed. 2021). Written for practitioners and published by the ABA. The most direct answer on this page to the question of what the framework changes about a lawyer's work. Print only.
  • Jill E. Adams & Melissa Mikesell, And Damned if They Don't: Prototype Theories to End Punitive Policies Against Pregnant People Living in Poverty, 18 Geo. J. Gender & L. 283 (2017). Argues that the mental prototype a legislator holds of the affected person shapes the statute that results. Directly useful when you are reading a bill for who it imagines. Adams co-founded the Berkeley center below.
  • Jill C. Morrison, Resuscitating the Black Body: Reproductive Justice as Resistance to the State's Property Interest in Black Women's Reproductive Capacity, 31 Yale J.L. & Feminism 35 (2019). Full text
  • Sarah London, Reproductive Justice: Developing a Lawyering Model, 13 Berkeley J. Afr.-Am. L. & Pol'y 71 (2011). Full text On practice rather than doctrine: what it changes about how a lawyer takes direction from a client and a community.
  • Gemma Donofrio, Note, Exploring the Role of Lawyers in Supporting the Reproductive Justice Movement, 42 N.Y.U. Rev. L. & Soc. Change 221 (2018). Full text
  • Note, Impediments to Reproductive Justice: The Criminal Legal System and American Carceral State, 137 Harv. L. Rev. (2024). Full text
Casebooks and further reading
  • Melissa Murray & Kristin Luker, Cases on Reproductive Rights and Justice (Foundation Press 2d ed. 2022; 1st ed. 2015). The first casebook in the field, developed while both authors were at Berkeley Law. Publisher access is limited to adopting faculty, so this one is a library or purchase item.
  • Reproductive Rights and Justice Stories (Melissa Murray, Katherine Shaw & Reva B. Siegel eds., Foundation Press 2019). Twelve landmark cases told through the people who brought them. Covers sterilization, family leave, family formation, and pregnancy discrimination, not only abortion and contraception. Library or purchase item.
  • Marie-Amélie George, Queering Reproductive Justice, 54 U. Rich. L. Rev. 671 (2020). Full text
  • Chase Strangio, Can Reproductive Trans Bodies Exist?, 19 CUNY L. Rev. 223 (2016). Full text With George above, on the framework's application beyond cisgender women, which matters for reading any bill drafted in gendered terms.
  • Center on Reproductive Rights and Justice, Berkeley Law. Website Across the Bay, and where a good deal of the legal scholarship in the middle column was written.

An honest limit

Ask for the reproductive justice literature on canons of statutory construction and you will not find much. The scholarship is thickest on constitutional interpretation, on the history behind particular statutes, and on movement lawyering. Its most direct payoff for statutory work is empirical rather than interpretive: it is very good on how facially neutral text is applied unevenly once it leaves the page, which is an argument about legislative design and enforcement design, not about text, canon, or intent. We use it accordingly, and we do not overclaim it.

Reading something we have missed, or a link that has gone dead? Send it to lrr@queensbench.org.

On our watch list

Tracking is not endorsement

Nothing on this list is a Queen's Bench position. Under our bylaws the association takes a position on a bill only after this committee recommends it and the Board of Directors approves it. Bills appear here because they would change the law our members practice in, or the law their clients live under, not because we are for them or against them.

Status changes fast, and in August it changes daily. Confirm anything you plan to rely on against the official record.

August 14, 2026
Last day for fiscal committees to report bills
August 31, 2026
Last day for each house to pass bills. Anything still moving dies here.
September 30, 2026
Last day for the Governor to sign or veto

Sacramento

The Legislature returns from summer recess on August 3 for the last month of session. This is the second year of the 2025–2026 session, so a bill that does not pass by August 31 does not carry over. It starts again from nothing when the next session convenes in December.

Select any card to turn it over

Washington

A different reading exercise. Most of what follows is stuck in committee and likely to stay there, so read these as direction rather than as forecast: they tell you what each side would do with a majority, and several have state analogues that move faster.

Select any card to turn it over

Track it yourself. California bill text, history, votes, and committee analyses are free and official at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov. Federal bills are at congress.gov. Search the bill number. The committee analyses are usually the fastest way to understand what a bill actually does.

Think we have missed something our members should see? Send it to lrr@queensbench.org. That is how most of this list got here.

Watch list last reviewed July 27, 2026. Positions of the association are set by the Board of Directors, not by this page.

Who leads this committee

Beth Hodess

Chair

Reach the whole committee at lrr@queensbench.org. It reaches the chairs and the Administrator, so nothing falls through when leadership rotates in January.

Good to know

The Board has the last word

This committee researches and recommends; it does not set the association's position. Every brief, endorsement, and public statement goes to the Board of Directors for approval before Queen's Bench says anything in its own name. (Bylaws, Art. VI, §D; Art. VII.)

You don't have to be on the Board

Committee chairs and members are drawn from the whole membership, not just the Board. The Executive Committee is the only exception. The President nominates each committee's chair and a majority of the Board approves the selection. Board service, more often than not, grows out of committee work. (Bylaws, Art. VI, §C.)

Join this committee

There's no application and no vetting. Tell us you're interested and we'll bring you in on the next round of work. Come to one meeting before you decide whether it's for you.

Committee leadership, programs, and meeting schedules are current as of July 2026 and change from year to year. Corrections and updates: admin@queensbench.org.

Queen’s Bench Bar Association

Promoting equality and opportunity since 1921

Follow Us

1250-I Newell Ave., Suite 220, Walnut Creek, CA 94596·admin@queensbench.org·(510) 966-0656

This line is voicemail only — leave your name, number, and a brief message, and we’ll call you back once we receive the transcript. Messages are checked Monday–Friday, 9:00 AM–5:00 PM Pacific.

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software