NOW Study Puts States’ Laws on the Scale

Asked to pinpoint the cutting edge of feminist progress in the country, most people probably would not mention the state of Washington. Nevertheless, women who live in the state of Washington are better protected by state law than women anywhere else in the United States.

Others in the top 10 states for women’s legal rights are Massachusetts, New York, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Michigan, Alaska, Maryland, New Jersey, Hawaii and Minnesota (tied for 10th place). California came in 14th, not only behind the above listed states plus Oregon and Iowa, but tied with North Carolina for the position.

This assessment is the result of a four-year survey of laws affecting women in the 50 states and the District of Columbia conducted by the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund. The survey has been published in a book, “The State by State Guide to Women’s Legal Rights” (McGraw-Hill, $12.95).

“The way we think of the book--and Los Angeles is particularly aware of NOW celebrating its 20th anniversary--is that it stands as a record of the last 20 years of women’s achievement in this country,” said Marsha Levick, executive director of the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund.

The study examined state laws in 16 areas affecting women in the fields of home and family law, employment, education and community life. The indices used to rank the states were whether there is a state equal rights amendment, equal employment, pay and pay equity laws, and a state Title IX (pertaining to equality in education). Home and family criteria were whether there is state funding for abortion, child support legislation and protections for women in the areas of domestic violence, displaced homemakers, community property, joint custody and a uniform marital property act. The other laws studied were those offering protections for women in insurance, credit, public accommodations and housing.

States were given points in each area to determine their ranking, and the points indicate that no states are doing extremely well. Washington, ranked No. 1, received only 36 points out of a possible 64, and only four states received as many as half the possible points. California received 25 points. The nation’s capital, Washington, D.C., ranked 28th with only 19 points.

The worst places to live for any woman concerned with equal rights under the law are Georgia, Mississippi, Nevada, Alabama and South Carolina, all with 10 or fewer points. Others in the bottom dozen were Kansas, Arkansas, Arizona, Delaware, Virginia, Texas and Oklahoma.

“It (the book) can be viewed as a consumer’s guide for women on how to use the legal system,” Levick said, and it can also be viewed as a blueprint for change. “Learning what rights are and how to enforce them are prerequisites to ending discrimination,” she said. “Action for change is certainly one of the by-products we hope for. We hope by educating women to encourage activism for better laws.”

Also, Levick said, the results of the survey provide objective support for the failed federal equal rights amendment. “I think it (the book) is a testament to the equal rights amendment. Seven of the top 10 states had state ERAs. The presence of an equal rights amendment forces policy makers, judges, legislators to have a higher standard of equality for women. This is evidence of the difference that a federal ERA could make in this country.”

“California stands fairly well. It has some good strengths,” Levick said. “It’s hanging in there on funding for abortion. (Only 15 states provide public funding for abortions for poor women.) It has one of the best equal education laws in the country. This is important since equal education law at the federal level was gutted by Grove City (the 1984 U.S. Supreme Court decision that narrowed the Title IX prohibition of sex discrimination in educational programs receiving federal funds; the court ruled that the anti-discrimination law applies only to those programs in a school that receive federal funds, not to the institution as a whole). The Supreme Court put equal education in an abysmal state,” Levick said.

The majority of states don’t have equal education laws. California’s education law “to many is a model of what state legislation should look like,” Levick said. It prohibits sex discrimination among students and employees and sexual harassment in all state educational institutions. And “California has always had one of the best civil rights laws,” Levick said.

Surprisingly, in that California is generally considered a socially progressive state, Levick said its greatest weaknesses in women’s legal protections are in family law. “A lot of folks think California is in the forefront, but there are problems in the area of divorce, for example. Though it’s one of only eight community property states, California has a mandatory equal distribution requirement. It sounds like a good deal, but it deprives judges of flexibility (in dividing property) when the woman has the greater need--such as receiving lower pay and that she is often the one with the children.”

California got only two of a possible four points for its community property law. By contrast, Arkansas, which ranked very badly overall in women’s rights, received all four points for its law that calls for equal division of property but permits the court to change this for considerations such as the employability and future earning power of the parties, the contributions each spouse made to the marriage or age and health factors.

Regarding child custody, “California was in the forefront, but has taken a wrong turn on joint custody,” Levick said, although “the law is potentially good. However, California assumes joint custody is in the best interest of a child. The presumption is in favor of joint custody, even if only one parent wants it. It (the law) is detrimental to everyone involved. The majority of states do it (provide for joint custody) when both parents agree.”

California received the maximum four points in four of the 16 areas surveyed: equal education law, state funding for abortion, domestic violence law and laws regarding public accommodations (covered by the state’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which provides equal access to public accommodations to all persons regardless of sex). The areas in which the state got zero points included its lack of a state equal rights amendment and its lack of provisions for displaced homemakers, which is ironic since the displaced homemaker movement was founded here.

Besides providing an overall look at laws across the country, the book provides detailed information for women in any state who have questions about issues ranging from whether common law marriages are valid to what will happen if a husband dies without a will. Levick says that the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund’s priorities for current action are economic issues for women, particularly in employment, insurance and pensions and the economic aspects of family law.