[ad_1]
A group of advocates and legal experts said recent Supreme Court decisions could have a variety of negative effects on public health in the United States at an event organized by the Harvard School of Public Health on Friday.
The panel — moderated by Washington Post political columnist Dana Milbank — included National Urban League President Mark Morial, attorney Esther Sanchez-Gomez, former Parenthood president Cecile Richards, and University of California, Santa Barbara political science professor Leah Stokes.
Panelists discussed the Supreme Court’s June 24 decision, Roe v. Wade, which stripped constitutional protections for abortion.
“Young people are frustrated, and they’re concerned,” Richards said.
He called on more health professionals to speak out about how the court’s decision would affect their patients.
“Access to reproductive health care is not a political issue – it’s a medical health care issue,” she said.
The panel noted that the court’s abortion rulings disproportionately affect women of color. If abortion were banned nationally, maternal mortality would increase by 21 percent overall and 33 percent among black women. Study of 2021.
Throughout the event, the panelists discussed the prevalence of misinformation in American politics. Moderator Milbank said the “use of disinformation” has made it “impossible to reach a consensus or even have a rational discussion of political discourse.”
Sanchez-Gomez said misinformation has played a role in the political discourse of recent gun rights cases in court.
Panelists also discussed the June Supreme Court ruling that limited the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Stokes said Congress passed language as part of the recently signed Inflation Reduction Act, which would “ensure that the EPA has standards to regulate carbon pollution.”
“In some ways, we have more power now to make sure we can tackle climate change — we have more legal protections,” she said. “I hope people don’t worry too much about this.”
Still, Stokes said the court’s recent rulings were “out of touch with the public” and could “lose its legitimacy.”
Sánchez-Gómez said that public health research gives us the tools to solve these problems, especially in [the] Gun Attack Prevention Site.
“Bringing young people together, encouraging them to have these conversations and giving them tools like public health research is a very important part of this conversation,” she said.
– You can find staff writer Dorcas Y. Gadrey at dorcas.gadri@thecrimson.com.
– You can find staff writer Krishi Kishore at krishi.kishore@thecrimson.com.
[ad_2]
Source link
