Legislative Advocacy

2019 Legislative Session Testimony

Legislative Advocacy

2020 Legislative Session Testimony

Legislative Advocacy

2021 Legislative Session Testimony

Legislative Advocacy

2018 Legislative Session Testimony

Our Resources
CT Campaign for Paid Family Leave

All workers deserve access to paid family and medical leave to recover from a serious illness, welcome a child, or care for a loved one. The Campaign for Paid Family Leave is a coalition led by CWEALF that advocated for the passage of one of the strongest paid leave laws in the nation in 2019 and is now focused on the implementation of Connecticut’s new paid leave program.

Legal Advocacy

Amicus Briefs 

For the past thirty years, CWEALF has written and participated in amicus curiae briefs in order to ensure that women’s concerns are heard when laws are enacted or reformed. The following is annotated listing of those briefs related to family, education, civil rights and employment law.

Family Matters

Adoption
Download PDF

  • In re Adoption of Baby Z, 1999
  • In re Adoption of CCG and ZCG, 2000
  • In re Adoption of RBF and RCF, 2000

Custody/Visitation
Download PDF

  • Ireland v. Ireland, 1998
  • State of Connecticut v. Anthony Vakilzaden, 1999
  • Troxel v. Granville, 1999
  • T.B. v. L.R.M., 2001

Child Support

Download PDF

  • Boris v. Blaisdell, 1985
  • Bowen v. Gilliard, 1987

Divorce and Property Distribution – Pension Plans

Download PDF

  • Tirmenstein v. Tirmenstein, 1989
  • Adams v. Adams, 1989
  • Berrington v. Berrington, 1993
  • Krafick v. Krafick, 1995

Equal Education for Girls and Women
Download PDF

Athletics/Title IX
Download PDF

  • Cohen v. Brown University, 1996
  • Klinger v. Department of Corrections, 1997
  • Boucher v. Syracuse University, 1999
  • Curetan v. NCAA, 1999
  • Smith v. NCAA, 2001
  • Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association, 2000
  • Communities for Equity v. Michigan High School Athletic Association, 2003
  • Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, 2005

 

Sexual Harassment (School)
Download PDF

  • Rowinsky v. Bryan Independent School District, 1996 (school – peer sexual harassment)
  • Bruneau v. South Kortright School District, 1998 (school – employer liability)
  • Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, 1999 (school – peer harassment)
  • Murrell v. School District No. 1, 1999 (school – peer harassment)
  • Reed v. Edelwich, 1996 (school – employer liability)
  • Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District, 1998 (school – employer liability)
  • Canty v. Old Rochester Regional School District, 1999 (school – § 1983 + Title IX)
  • Gleason v. Board of Trustees of Salem State College, 2000 (school – § 1983 + Title IX)
  • Litman v. George Mason University, 2004
  • Simpson v. University of Colorado, 2007
  • J.K. v. Arizona Board of Regents, 2008

Racial Discrimination

  • PICS v. Seattle School District, 2007

Workplace Issues
Download PDF

Employment Discrimination

Download PDF

  • Walters v. Metropolitan Educational Enterprises, Inc, 1996
  • Bryan County v. Brown, 1997
  • Atkinson v. Lafayette, 2006
  • Burlington Northern v. White, 2006
  • Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 2007

Sex Discrimination
Download PDF

  • Board of Directors of Rotary International v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 1987
  • United Auto Workers (UAW) v. Johnson Controls, 1991
  • J.E.B. v. Alabama ex. rel. T.B., 1994
  • State of Connecticut v. Walker, 1994
  • Faulkner v. Jones (the Citadel case), 1995
  • United States of America v. Virginia, 1995
  • United States of America v. Virginia, 1996
  • In re: Union Pacific Railroad Employment Practices Litigation, 2008

Sexual Harassment
Download PDF

  • Newsday, Inc. v. Long Island Typographical Union, No. 915, 1990
  • Comments to Proposed Guidelines on Harassment Based on Race, Color, Religion, Gender, National Origin, Age, and Disability, 1993
  • Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 1993
  • Gary v. Long, 1995
  • CHRO ex. rel. Bilodeau v. United Technologies, Pratt & Whitney, 1996
  • Angelsea Productions v. Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, 1996
  • Jenson v. Eleventh Taconite Co., 1997
  • Keslar v. Bartu, 2000
  • Brittell v. State of Connecticut Department of Corrections, 1998
  • Oncale v. Sundowner, 1998
  • Rocque v. Freedom of Information Commission, 2001
  • Pollard v. DuPont, 2001

Discrimination – Pregnancy
Download PDF

  • In re Valerie D., 1992
  • Ferguson v. City of Charleston, 2000

Family and Medical Leave Act

  • Testimony and Comments to the Advisory Commission on     Intergovernmental Relations Regarding the Family and Medical Leave Act,     1996
  • Hibbs v. Nevada Department of Human Resources, 2003

Discrimination
Download PDF

Discrimination – Language Proficiency

Download PDF

  • Alexander v. Sandoval, 2000

Discrimination – Sexual Orientation
Download PDF

  • Steffan v. Aspin, 1994
  • Romer v. Evans, 1996
  • Thomas v. Anchorage, 2000
  • CHRO/John-Jane Doe, 2000
  • Boy Scouts of America v. Wyman, 2003
  • Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health, 2007

Discrimination – Domestic Violence
Download PDF

  • Freedom of Information Commission v. Domestic Violence Services of Greater New Haven, Inc., 1998
  • Doe v. Doe, 1996
  • Culberson v. Doan, 1998
  • White v. El Gabri; Bentley v. El Gabri, 1998
  • Tsitaridis v. Tsitaridis, 2007

Reproductive Health – Buffer Zones
Download PDF

  • Pro-Choice Network of Western New York v. Schenck, 1995
  • Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York, 1997
  • United States and Connecticut v. Scott, 1999
  • Hill v. Colorado, 2000
  • People of the State of New York v. Operation Rescue National, 2001
  • McGuire v. Reilly, 2001

Reproductive Health – Other
Download PDF

  • Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, 1989
  • Hodgson v. Minnesota, 1989
  • Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 1989
  • Turner v. Ragsdale, 1989
  • Rust v. Sullivan together with New York v. Sullivan, 1991
  • Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1992
  • Winters v. Costco, 1995
  • Hope v. Perales, 1995
  • Letter to EEOC on Contraceptive Coverage, 1999
  • Stenberg v. Carhart, 2000
  • Bost v. Low-Income Women of Texas, 2002
  • Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, 2006

Sexual Assault
Download PDF

  • United States v. Lanier, 1997
  • Commonwealth v. Fischer, 1998
  • Letter to the FBI regarding the definition of rape for purposes of the Uniform Crime Report (UCR), 2001
  • In re Jonathan; Matthew G. v. State of Connecticut, 2002     Top of Page
Legislative Advocacy

Advocating for Women and Girls

CWEALF protects and promotes the rights of women and girls* by identifying and articulating the challenges they face and elevating their interests and voices through public policy and advocacy.

Read CWEALF’s 2021 Legislative Agenda in English or Español

*Our work supports women and girls who identify as cisgender, transgender, and non-binary as well as people of all marginalized gender identities systemically and historically oppressed by those in power.

CWEALF’s Legal Education Program helps us to understand the significant needs of women and girls throughout the state. To achieve better opportunities for women, CWEALF leads policy coalitions, offers public testimony, and collaborates with community partners.

CWEALF fights gender discrimination and advances the rights, opportunities and status of women and girls, with a focus on:

  • Economic Security and Success
  • Access to Justice
  • Workplace and Education Equity
  • Freedom from Violence and Harassment
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights

In addition to legislative monitoring, CWEALF leads coalitions on critical issues of equity in Connecticut. Currently, CWEALF leads the following coalitions:

As Chair of the Campaign for Paid Family Leave, CWEALF will monitor the implementation of paid family and medical leave to ensure the program is transparent, user-friendly, and prioritizes the most underserved Connecticut residents.

The Family Law Working Group: a diverse coalition of attorneys, advocates, legal professionals, and family law practitioners convened to monitor legislative proposals and task forces, ensuring fairness in laws relating to divorce, child support, alimony, and custody.

Guiding the Family Law Working Group’s work is CWEALF’s study, “Outcomes of Marriage Dissolution in Connecticut: an Empirical Study of Divorce, Custody, and Financial Support in 2012.” This study and report reviewed divorce cases in the year 2012.  Among many findings, this study found a decrease in child support orders, increased contact between fathers and children, efficient case processing, attorney representation in only approximately half of the cases, and weak economic circumstances for both parties, with a significant disparity in women’s financial standing.  Click here to read the full report.