Author: Carrie N. Baker

Carrie N. Baker, J.D., Ph.D., is the Sylvia Dlugasch Bauman professor of American Studies and the chair of the Program for the Study of Women and Gender at Smith College. She is a contributing editor at Ms. magazine. Read her latest book at Abortion Pills: U.S. History and Politics (Amherst College Press, December 2024). You can contact Dr. Baker at cbaker@msmagazine.com or follow her on Bluesky @carrienbaker.bsky.social.

Massachusetts Decriminalized Later Abortion, No Health Emergency Required

Massachusetts law no longer imposes a gestational-age limit on abortion—meaning for the first time, a woman in the state can choose to end her pregnancy at any point, without a prosecutor looking over her doctor’s shoulder.

Gov. Maura Healey (D) last month signed the Prioritizing Patient Access to Care Act, joining nine other states—Alaska, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon and Vermon, plus D.C.—in trusting patients and medical professionals to make abortion decisions throughout pregnancy, rather than politicians, police and prosecutors.

In Massachusetts, the legislative hearings focused on women who experienced a severe fetal diagnosis or a threat to their own health and had to travel out of state for medical care, which are very sympathetic stories that were able to win over many supporters.

While it’s certainly important that states like Massachusetts have made later abortion more accessible to people experiencing health emergencies, the Prioritizing Patient Access to Care Act is important for everyone seeking later abortion care, whatever the reason.

Beyond Abortion: How the ERA Could Transform Pregnancy, Work and Family Life

On Women’s Equality Day, the unfinished fight for constitutional equality extends far beyond abortion. State equal rights amendments—and, ultimately, a robust federal ERA—could reshape how the law treats pregnancy, motherhood, work and family life.

Ming-Qi Chu, deputy director of the Women’s Rights Project at the ACLU, says state ERAs could be used to counter discrimination against pregnant women. Chu uses the example of a Tennessee case last year where a pregnant woman was denied prenatal care because she was unmarried.

“If they’re only asking about marriage in the specific context of pregnancy, then they’re treating pregnancy differently from other medical conditions,” she says. “And the other theory [of discrimination] is that they’re asking this question because they want women to be married before getting pregnant, enforcing the stereotype that only married women should receive prenatal care or should have pregnancies that are recognized.”

“I can imagine a robust ERA that says that it is a violation of our equality rights to die or to face the risk of dying from something that one of the wealthiest nations in the world should have rendered as an anomaly, as an exceptional circumstance that just doesn’t happen here anymore,” University of California, Berkeley, law professor Khiara M. Bridges says.

“The ERA can give us a real basis for making more intersectional arguments about equality, and pushing courts to consider the intersection of sex discrimination and race discrimination in ways that they have been unwilling to do until now.”

After Dobbs, the ERA Offers a New Path to Abortion Rights

For 250 years, women have been fighting for inclusion in the nation’s founding promise of equality. The Equal Rights Amendment would finally guarantee that equality under the U.S. Constitution—and could give Congress and the courts powerful new tools to address discrimination in education, employment, healthcare and safety. It could also provide a constitutional basis for challenging abortion bans and restrictions as forms of sex discrimination.

But feminists do not have to wait for federal recognition of the ERA to put equality guarantees to work. State constitutions are already providing a path forward.

In Nevada, advocates successfully challenged the state’s ban on Medicaid funding for abortion under its Equal Rights Amendment; in Pennsylvania, courts have opened the door to treating restrictions on abortion funding as sex discrimination; and in Colorado, feminist lawyers are arguing that parental-notification requirements impose unequal burdens on young women while placing no comparable restrictions on young men.

At a moment when abortion rights no longer have federal constitutional protection, state ERAs offer feminists another constitutional path—not only to challenge abortion restrictions, but to confront the stereotypes and unequal burdens beneath them. Building strong interpretations of equality at the state level can protect women now while laying the groundwork for the expansive vision of sex equality a federal ERA could one day deliver nationwide.

(This essay is part of FEMINIST 250: Democracy’s Feminist Future, a special series examining the next chapter of American democracy through a feminist lens. As the nation marks its 250th anniversary, the series taps the thought leaders of today to debut game-changing ideas for the next 250 years.)

Matilda Joslyn Gage: The Most Radical Suffragist Written Out of History Is Still Urgently Relevant

and

Matilda Joslyn Gage was one of the most radical voices of the 19th-century women’s rights movement—and one of the most deliberately forgotten. Alongside Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, she helped build the suffrage movement, but Gage pushed further, challenging not only women’s political exclusion but also patriarchal religion, sexual violence, economic inequality and the erasure of women’s accomplishments from history.

Gage paired those radical ideas with bold action. She protested the 1886 unveiling of the Statue of Liberty because women themselves had no political liberty; refused to pay taxes without representation; and wrote Woman, Church and State, a blistering critique of Christianity’s role in legitimizing women’s subordination. Her willingness to confront institutions other suffragists feared alienating ultimately helped push her out of the movement’s mainstream history.

A century later, Gage’s warnings feel strikingly current. As voting rights, bodily autonomy and the separation of church and state once again come under attack, her insistence that women understand their own history—and see themselves as part of a struggle extending across generations—offers both a warning and a call to action.

Built to Withstand Trump-Era Attacks on Mifepristone: New Telehealth Provider Serves All 50 States for Sliding-Scale Fee

Telehealth provider At Home Abortion just opened Aug. 11, but the six doctors and nurses running the service have over 100 years combined experience providing abortion and other reproductive healthcare.

At Home Abortion (AHA) is the latest to join the growing field of telehealth abortion providers. AHA is unique in that the company serves patients in all 50 states, offers comprehensive support to all their patients and is based in Europe so is resistant to Trump administration attacks on telehealth abortion with mifepristone. In other words, AHA will be able to continue to provide gold-standard abortion pill service with mifepristone and misoprostol, no matter what the Trump administration, courts or Republican states do to try to suppress mifepristone access inside the United States.

“We’re here to make it as easy, safe and available as possible for people to get care, and we want to support people all the way through,” said an AHA representative.

The intake form takes about five minutes to complete. Clinicians review intake forms within one to 12 hours. When a patient is eligible for a medication abortion, AHA providers send a prescription to a pharmacy in a shield law state that sends FDA-approved medicines—one mifepristone and 12 misoprostol—to the patient in a plain package to any address in the United States plus military bases and US territories. The pill containers do not have the patient’s or the provider’s names on them, ensuring confidentiality. AHA also sends anti-nausea medication. Patients receive the medications in two to four days.

Then, through a secure messaging portal, AHA sends the patient clear and detailed instructions on how to use the medications and what to expect during and after the abortion. AHA also shares a telephone number for the patient to call or text for questions.

AHA providers are available 24/7 to support their patients by voice or text before, during and after the abortion.

“That is really important to us, especially in the United States where people are so afraid of what is going on and afraid to search out other care,” said an AHA representative. “We want to make sure that we are there for them. We know that anxiety increases people’s pain. It makes the experience more difficult. So they need that support.”

In addition to abortion pills, AHA offers miscarriage care, emergency contraception and birth control, as well as abortion pills in advance of pregnancy.

If the Louisiana lawsuit attempting to restrict mifepristone succeeds, or the FDA reinstates medically unnecessary restrictions on mifepristone, AHA has several options to continue providing telehealth abortion with mifepristone to patients in all 50 states and territories.

A Groundbreaking U.N. Resolution Calls Forced Pregnancy What It Is: Reproductive Violence

It took until July 7, 2026, for the world’s leading human rights body to call forcing someone to be pregnant—or forcing them not to be—what it is: reproductive violence. In a landmark resolution adopted unanimously, the U.N. Human Rights Council formally recognized “reproductive violence” as a specific, systemic form of gender-based violence. 

This historic U.N. declaration has implications for the United States, where 41 states ban abortion at some point during pregnancy. These bans block medical providers from offering needed care, and enable police and state attorneys to arrest and criminally prosecute pregnant women whose reproductive decision-making they oppose.

Any law or government action that requires a person to carry a pregnancy to term against their will is a form of bodily assault. The dynamics mirror domestic violence and sexual assault. The core of rape is the violation of consent—taking control of another person’s body and forcing them to submit. Abortion bans likewise hijack a person’s body, stripping them of their bodily integrity and self-determination.

As anti-violence advocate Irene Weiser once asked: “How can we ever begin to end violence against women if the laws of our society will not even guarantee the most fundamental of human right to women—to say at all times, under all circumstances, what we allow to happen to our bodies?”

The Biggest Threat to Women’s Sports Isn’t Trans Athletes. It’s the Trump Administration’s Failure to Uphold Title IX’s Promise of Equal Opportunity.

The politicians who have spent years claiming to “protect women’s sports” have been remarkably absent when it comes to enforcing the law that actually guarantees women equal athletic opportunities. W

hile the Trump administration has devoted enormous energy to policing transgender participation, Title IX complaints involving unequal opportunities, funding and treatment have languished. The result is a political performance that invokes women athletes while doing little to address the inequities they continue to face.

The real defenders of women’s sports are the athletes themselves.

This month alone, women at Christopher Newport University and California Lutheran University successfully used Title IX to force their schools to reverse decisions that eliminated athletic opportunities for women. Their victories are a reminder of what Title IX was designed to do: expand opportunity, not fuel culture wars.

If we truly care about women’s sports, we should celebrate the athletes and advocates who are making the law’s promise of equality a reality—not those who merely claim to speak in their name.

What to Know About Later Abortions: Myths, Barriers and Patient Stories

Later abortion is one of the most stigmatized and least understood aspects of reproductive health, and yet some of the voices perpetuating that stigma come from inside the reproductive rights movement itself. Meanwhile, while most abortions happen in the first trimester, later abortions are increasing as restrictions and bans are delaying care and creating the very conditions that make them necessary.

To address these misconceptions, Erika Christensen and Garin Marschall created Patient Forward after Christensen experienced a later abortion in 2016. The organization is dedicated to eliminating later abortion stigma and barriers.

“We have a lot of folks in the media, including repro[ductive rights] advocates, saying, ‘Nobody wants to do this,’ or, ‘It’s not even available,’ or, ‘Nobody’s getting abortions that late.’ Yes, they are. They’re getting them in safe, modern, incredibly compassionate abortion clinics,” said Christensen. “We do a lot of destigmatizing work.”

Patient Forward emphasizes that most people who obtain a later abortion would have preferred to access an abortion earlier: “Contrary to popular rhetoric, patients do not wait. Rather, they are delayed.”

“We have found that young people are much later to recognize they’re pregnant because their periods are irregular anyway, because they may not be familiar with all the symptoms of pregnancy,” says Dr. Diana Foster Greene of University of California San Francisco. “People with chronic health conditions are also later to discover they’re pregnant because often chronic health conditions have the same symptoms of pregnancy.”

Abortion Rates Continue to Climb as Telehealth Reshapes Post-Dobbs America

Four years after Dobbs, a striking reality has emerged: Abortion bans have not eliminated the need for abortion.

Instead, new #WeCount data show that abortions have increased nationwide, driven in large part by the rapid expansion of telehealth and abortion pills by mail.

Even in states that have attempted to ban abortion entirely, patients continue to find ways to obtain care through shield-law providers, telehealth services and community-based networks.

The data also reveal how dramatically abortion care has changed. Telehealth now accounts for more than a quarter of all abortions provided within the formal healthcare system, offering many patients a safer, more affordable and more private alternative to in-person care.

For people living under bans and severe restrictions, it has become an essential lifeline—one that has reshaped where and how abortion care is delivered across the country.

Yet the numbers likely tell only part of the story. As antiabortion politicians and the Trump administration target mifepristone and telehealth abortion, providers are already adapting.

The lesson of the post-Dobbs era is clear: The demand for abortion has not disappeared, and despite relentless efforts to restrict it, people continue to find ways to access the care they need.

Latin American Feminists Train U.S.-Based Doulas on New Mifepristone Protocol for Second-Trimester Abortions

As Republicans create ever higher barriers to abortion that push abortion seekers later into pregnancy, U.S.-based activists are learning from Latin American feminists who have developed protocols to make second-trimester medication abortion easier and safe: using a double-dose mifepristone protocol for pregnancies 17 weeks of gestation and longer.

For second-trimester abortions, taking two mifepristone means needing less misoprostol, which eases painful contractions and shortens the time to uterine expulsion.

Whereas mifepristone’s side effects are mild—mainly headaches and some nausea that can be treated with medications—misoprostol causes diarrhea, chills and vomiting, which are much harder to experience. Using two mifepristone also significantly reduces the period of painful contractions—from 15 to 18 hours, to often less than six hours, which is critical for women who have to work or care for children or relatives.

Supported women have expressed great satisfaction with the process.

People seek abortion care later in pregnancy for the same reasons they do early in pregnancy, said Erika Christensen, cofounder of Patient Forward, which works to eliminate barriers to abortion care later in pregnancy and provides resources on how find later abortion care—but many are not able to access care as soon as they would like. “This could be because they learned a piece of new information later in their pregnancy, like a health threat to themselves or to the fetus, a new extenuating life circumstance, or it could be the new information could be that they’re pregnant.”