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.

War on Women Report: Todd Blanche Is AG, Despite Pledge to Make Dobbs ‘Permanent’; Karen Attiah Is Back at WaPo (With Backpay); Rep. Cory Mills Loses Reelection After Abuse Allegations

MAGA Republicans are back in the White House, and Project 2025 is their guide, the right-wing plan to turn back the clock on women’s rights, remove abortion access, and force women into roles as wives and mothers in the “ideal, natural family structure.”

We know an empowered female electorate is essential to democracy. That’s why day after day, we stay vigilant in our goals to dismantle patriarchy at every turn. We are watching, and we refuse to go back. This is the War on Women Report.

Since our last report:
—Under mounting pressure from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Scouting America eliminated dedicated community spaces for LGBTQ+ youth, girls and Scouts of color at its annual 2026 National Jamboree in West Virginia.
—An 18-year-old girl in North Carolina is facing criminal charges after allegedly taking abortion pills 31 weeks into her pregnancy, which prompted her to go into early labor.
—After a controversial two-day confirmation hearing in July, Todd Blanche has been confirmed as the new U.S. attorney general.
—In a win for domestic violence survivors, Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.) lost his bid for reelection amid accusations of abuse from women he has dated.
—A groundbreaking new report documents dozens of federal immigration agents who have faced administrative disciplinary action or criminal penalties for violent crimes.
—Ohio’s Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) abruptly ended its policy allowing transgender residents to update the gender marker on their driver’s licenses and state IDs to match their gender identity. 
—Chicago mother Keshia Golden, who says she killed her boyfriend in self defense in 2022, accepted a plea deal for involuntary manslaughter, allowing her to avoid jail time.
—Karen Attiah, columnist for The Washington Post, has won her job back, after being fired last year for her comments on race, gender and violence in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s death.

… and more.

I Sympathize With the Gender-Policing Boys That Ruined My Childhood—Because Homophobia and Bullying Are Symptoms of the Same Disease

Across the country, many boys and young men are navigating loneliness and uncertainty about who they are expected to become. Rigid ideals of masculinity can shape that search: Be self-reliant. Do not show too much emotion. Face problems alone. Looking for acceptance and a sense of belonging, some move through online communities and public figures—from red-pill influencers and podcasters to politicians—that offer competing, often prescriptive, ideas of manhood.

I was one of these young boys nearly 20 years ago. This is my story.

Keshia Golden’s Plea Deal Kept Her Out of Prison—But Don’t Mistake It for Justice

Keshia Golden’s attorneys say that in October 2022, while she was eight-plus months pregnant, her then-boyfriend Calvin Sidney hit her, grabbed her hair and slammed her head against a kitchen counter. Golden grabbed a kitchen knife and stabbed Sidney in the leg. Golden only intended to make him stop, she has always insisted. But she hit the femoral artery. Sidney died at a Chicago hospital.

Keshia Golden was charged with first-degree murder and held in jail, where, weeks from giving birth, she was transferred to the medical unit to recover from her injuries. Four years passed.

Then, on Aug. 24, 2026, just before Golden’s trial was to begin, the Cook County state’s attorney Eileen O’Neill Burke offered Golden a last-minute deal: If she pled guilty to involuntary manslaughter and underwent two years of community service, drug testing and probation, she would serve no prison time.

All evidence points to the fact that Golden acted in self-defense and should never have been charged in the first place.

Nonetheless, she accepted the plea.

Her acceptance of this lesser charge is not an admission of guilt. It’s also not justice.

Golden is a single mother who was forced to make an impossible choice to ensure she would be able to raise her 3-year-old daughter. “All she has is me,” Golden said in court. 

Now, the only remaining path to justice for Golden is a pardon from Gov. JB Pritzker. Such a pardon would send a clear message: No woman should have to die to prove that she was a victim. No one should be punished for surviving abuse, defending themselves or protecting their child.

‘That’s Just Aging’ Is Not a Diagnosis

As a physician, I was trained with the same mantra: that hormone therapy was only for women who were absolutely miserable, and that if we were to prescribe it, it was for the least amount of time at the smallest dose.

That was completely wrong.

In 2002, part of the Women’s Health Initiative study was halted prematurely for a press release that essentially stated that hormone therapy caused breast cancer—when in actuality, the women who took estrogen alone (those without a uterus) actually had a reduced risk for breast cancer.

The mangling of that messaging is in large part responsible for scaring a generation of physicians off prescribing hormone therapy and terrifying generations of women away from taking the very things—estrogen and progesterone—that improve the immediate symptoms of menopause (such as hot flashes, night sweats, vaginal dryness and recurrent UTIs) and prevent the long-term consequences of estrogen depletion like osteoporosis, heart disease and premature cognitive decline.

Every time you refuse to accept a doctor telling you, “That’s just aging,” you aren’t just advocating for yourself. You’re doing structural work. You’re demanding to be seen as a full person, not as a set of body parts.

The questions women ask in exam rooms are how the gap between medical evidence and clinical practice closes. It’s how we close the disparity between men’s health and women’s health.

Health, after all, isn’t about having all the answers. It’s about asking better questions—of yourself, and of the people responsible for your care.

Heidi Overton and the Overton Window

Last week, President Trump posted to Truth Social his plan to nominate Dr. Heidi Overton as commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (The Contrarian covered the departure of her predecessor, Dr. Marty Makary, when he was pushed out in May.)

This nomination indicates the administration’s further normalization of gutting healthcare and drug safety—yes, its attempt to shift the Overton Window. (Given her last name, how can I resist?) The Overton Window theory reflects the efforts of deft politicians to deliberately mold public perception of a policy or idea—and its eventual support or rejection. Hence, the widening or closing of the Overton Window.

Overton’s record leaves no doubt this administration aims to smash the window altogether. She currently serves as deputy director of the White House Domestic Policy Council and was part of the first Trump administration as well. Though she trained in surgery at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, there’s been nothing subtle about her resume or affiliations since her residency—including and especially her prominent role at America First Policy Institute (AFPI), a think tank that “exists to advance policies that … prioritize[e] free enterprise, national greatness, American military superiority, foreign-policy engagement in the American interest, and the primacy of American workers, families, and communities.”

A highlight reel of her AFPI tenure: She publicly celebrated when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade with its Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision in 2022, stating that the ruling “will allow Americans to reevaluate the value of the potential of every baby in the womb and choose life through a democratic process.” She has questioned the long-established safety record of mifepristone, indicating her opposition to the FDA’s approval for its availability via telehealth. She has authored research and papers opposing gender-affirming care for minors; in a 2024 Newsweek op-ed, Overton complained that Democrats “won’t even define what a woman is.”

FreeBC Offers Reliable Info on All Kinds of Birth Control *and* Free Contraception to Anyone in Colorado, With Plans to Expand Nationwide

In this age of legal attacks on birth control access and shifting Medicaid coverage, a new online resource has emerged to educate people about the birth control methods available to them and provide them for no fee.

The website FreeBC now offers comprehensive information about every effective birth control method—from pills, patches and rings, to IUDs and implants.

After exploring their options, users can then schedule a telehealth appointment with a healthcare professional. After a patient decides which form of birth control they want to start with, FreeBC will either send it in the mail in discreet packaging or help the patient find a nearby clinic if needed for a method like IUD insertion. 

FreeBC is currently available only in Colorado, with plans to expand soon to patients in additional states.

Talking Back to Dobbs: Federal Judge Says Idaho Can’t Force Pregnant Women to ‘Endure All Harm Short of Death’

A federal district court issued the first post-Dobbs decision recognizing the U.S. Constitution still protects the right to abortion in specific circumstances.

And while legal opinions rarely move me to tears—as even the most progressive outcomes are typically cloaked in legal jargon that does not communicate the often urgent or tragic human experience underlying the case—Judge B. Lynn Winmill’s deeply attentive opinion in Seyb did just that.

Idaho has one of the nation’s strictest abortion regimes: Abortion is generally criminalized at every stage of pregnancy, with narrow exceptions. As Winmill writes, as a direct consequence of this ban, “a woman’s body itself is conscripted into service and forced to bear permanent damage in service of the potential life she carries.”

Winmill ruled Idaho’s abortion ban was unconstitutional on two grounds.

1. It violated the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause by denying pregnant patients a fundamental right to medically indicated abortion care.

2. By excluding self-harming behavior from the law’s life-saving exception, it denied patients with mental-health conditions equal protection under the 14th Amendment.

In their initial complaint, the plaintiff Dr. Seyb and his legal team that the requested relief “will address only a fraction of the harm that Idaho’s Abortion Bans are causing.” While meaningful, they wrote, such relief alone cannot secure justice for all Idaho residents; that would require repeal of the abortion bans through legislation or direct democracy—or the Supreme Court’s reversal of Dobbs.

Voters may soon have an opportunity to pursue that broader relief: In the upcoming midterms, Idahoans can cast a vote in favor of the Idaho Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act, a ballot initiative to restore abortion access in the state.

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.”

How Abortion Restrictions Exacerbate America’s Affordability Crisis

Few decisions carry more weight than whether or when to have a child. Women who decide to end a pregnancy are making an intensely personal, at times deeply emotional, decision. They deserve quality care, compassion and respect. Instead, under the Trump administration, abortion restrictions are expanding and options for care are disappearing.

Four years after the Supreme Court’s  Dobbs ruling, abortion care comes with a maze of logistical and financial hurdles.

A new study from the Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) concluded Widespread abortion restrictions across numerous states and the rollback of federal funding and protections costs our country $140 billion annually. And the 16 states with the most restrictive abortion policies cost the national economy nearly $68 billion annually in lost earnings.

In the U.S. today, abortion is increasingly reserved for those who can find and pay for it.

We urge new thinking: Instead of a return to the  Roe v. Wade era ripe with restrictions and hurdles, let’s govern expansively. We envision a supportive government that makes abortion accessible to anyone who needs it.