Union Pacific Case on Contraceptive Coverage Could Change the Rules Nationwide

Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.


Last week the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in the case against Union Pacific Railroad, which is being sued for failing to cover contraceptives in its health plans. In July 2005 a U.S. District court ruled in favor of the two women who filed the suit along with Planned Parenthood. The original ruling stating that Union Pacific, which employs about 49,000 workers nationwide, including 1,300 (that’s 2.6% for those of you keeping track), illegally discriminates against female employees by not providing contraceptive coverage in its health plans.

The lower court went further, saying that Union Pacific’s policy is in violation of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employers with 15 or more employees from discrimination based on gender or pregnancy. The policy was deemed discriminatory because it covered many preventive health medications — including drugs for erectile dysfunction — but not contraception.

The company has argued that it did not need to provide contraceptive coverage “because fertility is ‘normal,'” and, therefore, birth control is not “medically necessary.” Ah, and Viagra is sooo necessary.

Judge Pasco Bowman, who sits on the appeals court panel said Thursday that if the ruling holds it could mandate all companies to cover birth control in their plans.

HERE ARE THE FACTS:

Our fall fundraising drive is off to a rough start, and we very much need to raise $250,000 in the next couple of weeks. If you value the journalism you get from Mother Jones, please help us do it with a donation today.

As we wrote over the summer, traffic has been down at Mother Jones and a lot of sites with many people thinking news is less important now that Donald Trump is no longer president. But if you're reading this, you're not one of those people, and we're hoping we can rally support from folks like you who really get why our reporting matters right now. And that's how it's always worked: For 45 years now, a relatively small group of readers (compared to everyone we reach) who pitch in from time to time has allowed Mother Jones to do the type of journalism the moment demands and keep it free for everyone else.

Please pitch in with a donation during our fall fundraising drive if you can. We can't afford to come up short, and there's still a long way to go by November 5.

payment methods

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Our fall fundraising drive is off to a rough start, and we very much need to raise $250,000 in the next couple of weeks. If you value the journalism you get from Mother Jones, please help us do it with a donation today.

As we wrote over the summer, traffic has been down at Mother Jones and a lot of sites with many people thinking news is less important now that Donald Trump is no longer president. But if you're reading this, you're not one of those people, and we're hoping we can rally support from folks like you who really get why our reporting matters right now. And that's how it's always worked: For 45 years now, a relatively small group of readers (compared to everyone we reach) who pitch in from time to time has allowed Mother Jones to do the type of journalism the moment demands and keep it free for everyone else.

Please pitch in with a donation during our fall fundraising drive if you can. We can't afford to come up short, and there's still a long way to go by November 5.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate