Menstrual Justice After Dobbs

Abstract

This Article identifies and analyzes the category of state and private regulation that is invisible and subordinates women and other menstruators in ways that impact their privacy, liberty, and equality. Because this category of regulation is pervasive, bringing it to light is critical for considering how best to curb its harm. This Article considers potential legal strategies to counter such menstruation regulation and argues that Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization offers some promise—but more cause for pessimism—regarding the U.S. Constitution’s power to do so. This Article therefore explains how subconstitutional law offers greater potential, while cautioning that political science research shows progressive law reform can be limited by a misogynistic strategy, that is, the political strategy of maintaining patriarchal order and female gender roles