Advertisement
The Body: The Complete HIV/AIDS Resource
Follow Us Follow Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter Download Our App
Professionals >> Visit The Body PROThe Body en Espanol
  
  • Email Email
  • Comments Comments
  • Printable Single-Page Print-Friendly
  • Glossary Glossary

Commentary & Opinion

Editorial, Opinion Piece Respond to Supreme Court Case Challenging Anti-Prostitution Pledge

April 23, 2013

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday heard a case -- AOSI v. USAID -- challenging a 2003 federal statute that requires non-profit organizations to adopt an "anti-prostitution policy" in order to receive federal funding for HIV/AIDS programs abroad, on the grounds that it violates the First Amendment. The following summarizes an editorial and an opinion piece addressing the case.

  • New York Times: "[T]his provision violates the recipients' First Amendment right to freedom of expression. It clearly does by requiring them to speak and advocate the government's position, without the option of staying silent," the editorial states. "This provision could also hurt outreach programs by undermining trust with sex workers, who may avoid seeking help from organizations with a declared anti-prostitution agenda," the newspaper continues, adding, "Compelling that speech is unconstitutional," and "[t]he Supreme Court should affirm the appeals court and rule that the First Amendment prohibits this form of official control" (4/22).
  • Serra Sippel, Huffington Post's "Politics" blog: "It's not just a mere inconvenience to be told what you can and cannot believe as an organization fighting HIV," Sippel, president of the Center for Health and Gender Equity, writes. "Being able to find a solution to this devastating illness means being able to implement best practices in public health, to explore new approaches, to talk to anyone and everyone about risk and prevention. Freedom of speech and freedom of belief feed an effective public health response," she continues, adding, "Engaging sex workers to stem the spread of HIV requires building trust and ending stigma and discrimination -- isn't it counterintuitive to force organizations to pledge opposition to one of the groups most at risk of HIV infection? Isn't it irresponsible, if not dangerous, to exclude the contributions of people affected by a pandemic?" (4/22).

Back to other news for April 2013


This information was reprinted from kff.org with permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Global Health Policy Report, search the archives, and sign up for email delivery. © Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.



  
  • Email Email
  • Comments Comments
  • Printable Single-Page Print-Friendly
  • Glossary Glossary

This article was provided by Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. It is a part of the publication Kaiser Daily Global Health Policy Report. Visit the Kaiser Family Foundation's website to find out more about their activities, publications and services.
 
See Also
More News on U.S. Financial Aid for HIV in the Developing World
Advertisement:
Find out how a Walgreens specially trained pharmacist can help you

No comments have been made.
 

Add Your Comment:
(Please note: Your name and comment will be public, and may even show up in
Internet search results. Be careful when providing personal information! Before
adding your comment, please read TheBody.com's Comment Policy.)

Your Name:


Your Location:

(ex: San Francisco, CA)

Your Comment:

Characters remaining:

Tools
 

Advertisement