Q&A with Andrew Adams: social justice and looming Supreme Court rulings

Chief of Staff & Head of Strategic Communications Andrew Adams came to PPMM in 2019 with an impressive background in advocacy and strategic planning, including nearly five years at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in New York and a stint at the U.N. office of Plan International, a development and humanitarian organization that advances children’s rights and equality for girls. He also earned a law degree along the way.

While at Plan, Andrew developed a project for pre-teen and teenage girls from around the world to appear at the U.N., speaking about their sexual health and education rights, and ending gender-based violence. We caught up with Andrew to get his perspective on legal battles currently facing Planned Parenthood.

PPMM: What is something new you learned during your work in the legal advocacy community about the effect of U.S. Supreme Court rulings?

Andrew Adams: Reading Supreme Court opinions, rather than relying upon news articles about the decisions, shows that Justices often decide cases on technical issues and a very specific reading of the law. There’s often a real disconnect between how a case is argued, legally, and the impact the decision has on entire communities of people.

PPMM: If the Supreme Court overturns or guts the 1973 Roe decision when it rules on the pending Louisiana abortion case, June Medical Services v. Russo, what do you think will be the most immediate impact?

Andrew: I’m concerned for all women, but especially lower-income and women of color in the South and Midwest who will lose access to abortion care. It may be easier and less expensive to catch a flight to get the care they need in California rather than risk driving hundreds or even thousands of miles from their homes, only to face the burden of TRAP laws in surrounding states where abortion may remain tacitly legal.

PPMM: If the Supreme Court allows employers to deny their employees contraception-coverage based on religious beliefs or “moral grounds,” what do you think will be most harmed?

Andrew: Employees at companies exempted from the so-called birth control mandate in the Affordable Care Act would be profoundly affected by being denied contraception-coverage. But the biggest injustice would be the further erosion of democratic norms that continues to happen before our eyes. What does it say when an employer can prevent women from obtaining safe and legal medication?

PPMM: Since you’ve been at PPMM, are there aspects of reproductive rights that you think about differently?

Andrew: As a queer man, I was already familiar with PPMM’s services like STI-testing and treatment – especially the HIV-prevention medications PEP and PrEP, which is liberating because it allows people to be protected and in control. Working at PPMM, I’ve made the connection between the feeling of freedom I have with PrEP and the added dimension of control people feel over their personal lives because of effective contraceptives like the path, pill, and LARCs like IUDs and implants. I’m so proud to work for an organization that enables people the freedom to plan their families and their futures.