Is there Federal legislation regarding NIP?

[thebee321]

I found this on the LLL site:

"Mothers have a right to breastfeed where they go with their baby, even if that is out in public. It does not matter whether the mother goes to a public or a private place, or even whether they are in a state with legislation. No one has the right to tell a mother how to feed her baby, especially a way that increases the risk of illness to both mother and baby! Legislation has been enacted in nearly one-half of the states in the U.S. because they want to clarify this right, and in some cases, provide a remedy for mothers told to stop breastfeeding."

It says the state laws merely clarify the right, but I can't find any kind of federal law to support that we have "the right to breastfeed where they go with their baby"

Does anyone know?

[lacysmommy]

The only federal legislation I know of is the right for moms to breastfeed in any federal building where mom and baby are both allowed to be. Other than that, I don't know of any federal legislation.

[thebee321]

Maybe I'm not using the term federal correctly. What I'm wondering is LLL makes it clear that we are free to breastfeed our children wherever we are allowed to be. They say the state laws are just for emphasis, basically. So where is the law that tells everyone it is safe for us to go out and breastfeed in public anywhere in the country?

[Janice in Canada]

I think what LLL is trying to explain, is that the same way that we are allowed to do "anything" we want - ie scratch our nose, can skip down the street, drink a coffee while walking, etc - unless it is prohibited by some law. Your constitution gives "freedom of movement" and "freedom of expression" (or something like that). FTMP, we don't make "laws" that allow every little thing we do, we just sometimes makes laws that prohibit things that we decide are in the public good that we shouldn't do.

(That's were public decency laws fit in. These are laws that do restrict freedom. Because these laws exist, and could possibly be applied to breastfeeding, that is why some states are making specific breastfeeding protections laws to counteract and make sure that public decency laws are NOT applied to breastfeeding).

So there doesn't have to be a written federal law that allows you to breastfeed (and I don't think there is one). But I would think it is protected under the constitution or some other "bigger" concept law like that. Perhaps some American or someone who really knows your Constitition can explain better.

For example, in Canada, we have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that protect our general freedoms. It is under that protection, that we would make a Human Rights Complaint is we were asked to stop breastfeeding in pubic.

HTH
Janice

[Jordansmommy]

This is a good thread. The laws are sort of fuzzy so I'm a little curious about something myself. I thought private business owners were allowed to decide what they allow on their premises? For example, certain establishments refuse service based on attire (shirt and shoes, jacket and tie, etc) so can they get away with turning away breastfeeding mothers under similar logic?

[thebee321]

Jordansmommy,

I'm thinking they can't, but that's what I'm trying to get to the bottom of. Most of the laws that do exist say the mother can breastfeed wherever the mother and child are otherwise allowed to be, so unless the sign says "no shirt, no shoes, no mothers and no babies" I wouldn't think they can. I am always perplexed by those signs that say "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone"...I guess they can, but they can also get sued over it!

[hypatia]

That was an excellent explanation by Janice.

[

[hypatia]

Originally Posted by Jordansmommy

I thought private business owners were allowed to decide what they allow on their premises? For example, certain establishments refuse service based on attire (shirt and shoes, jacket and tie, etc) so can they get away with turning away breastfeeding mothers under similar logic?

In states with laws codifying women's rights to breastfeed wherever they are authorized to be, they cannot turn breastfeeding mothers down for that reason.

In states without breastfeeding laws, there's no laws saying they CAN discriminate on the basis of breastfeeding. If somebody tried to prevent me from breastfeeding in a private business in one of those states, I'd refuse and say, "Surely you don't want to violate my civil rights?" If you act calm and collected and absolutely certain of your right to breastfeed there, most people will back down. [Whoever these people are, they're unlikely to have spent much time recently reading up on breastfeeding laws.]

[applejuice]

I hope there are no federal breastfeeding laws.

Do you really want the federal government regulating breastfeeding?

Or having anything at all to say about it?

i think they need to butt out of most of our lives...

[Janice in Canada]

re: clothing in restuarants

This wouldn't work in Canada.

some clothing requirements are in force because of health regulations (ie no shoes, no shirt, no service). A dress code could be enforced by a business, because there is no "human right" to be able to dress a certain way. Another example is, a business could refuse to hire someone of the basis of personal grooming. There is no protection for dressing like a slob, or inappropriately.

But in Canada, there is Human Rights Code protection against discrimination on the basis of sex, sexual status, race, age, family status, religion, disability, etc. I would think there is similar protection through something in the United States. Ie a business can't refuse to serve someone because of their colour, etc.

I have heard of this example from Texas - I really question whether that business's right to refuse to serve a breastfeeding woman would really hold up if brought before the courts. I don't think it was.

Janice

[hypatia]

Janice,

Texas has a law permitting a woman to breastfeed anyplace she is authorized to be (see thread entitled "I was asked to cover up!"), which ought to trump any rights of restaurants to discriminate.

[Janice in Canada]

I'd refuse and say, "Surely you don't want to violate my civil rights?"

Okay, I get it. In the United States, you call them "civil rights". In Canada we call them "human rights". (Those basic fundamental rights provided through your country's constitution/main governing document).


Janice

[Janice in Canada]

Texas has a law permitting a woman to breastfeed anyplace she is authorized to be (see thread entitled "I was asked to cover up!"), which ought to trump any rights of restaurants to discriminate.

Yes, I know. But recently there was a mom refused service at some restuarant in Texas ("Red Rock"???? or something like that - a few months ago - it was in the papers). some moms went back and again were refused service and the owner stuck to his guns that he could refuse service to anyone he wanted. I don't know if any legal entity followed up with this case - the last I heard in the newspaper reports, he felt he had won and hadn't apologized or changed his policy.

This is what frustrates me. These laws and rights exist, and if the establishement or person is made aware of them, usually they apologize. But if they refuse, there never seems to be any legal entity to take this on and force them to. Basically, it seems, if the person/business refuses to respect the law, no one (the police, an organization) does anything about it.

Janice

[paquerette]

I always pull out the race card, as far as analogy goes, because most Americans are pretty familiar with the civil rights movement. If the property owner couldn't ask you to leave, or "cover up" (like being asked to go to the back of the bus) for being black, they shouldn't be able to ask you to leave for breastfeeding. Which means to me that someone could ask you to leave their home, but not their restaurant or store. It also seems to me that a lot of the same people, or same types of people, that didn't want to see blacks in the 60s are the ones that don't want to see breasts now.

[hypatia]

Originally Posted by Janice in Canada

This is what frustrates me. These laws and rights exist, and if the establishement or person is made aware of them, usually they apologize. But if they refuse, there never seems to be any legal entity to take this on and force them to.

Janice

I hadn't heard about that Texas case. That's horrible. Yes, it's a problem if there's no statutory teeth.