More Than A Magazine, A Movement
While dressed in modern garb, today’s distrust of accusers who delay reporting is hardly new. For most of our history, a “prompt outcry” rule was baked into our law, as explained in my book on accuser credibility. The rule rested on an abiding suspicion of accusers, equating delayed reporting with falsehood and allowing only rape allegations reported soon after the incident to proceed.
“It’s just domestic violence.”
“They did not have a good relationship.”
If I had a dime for every utterance of those repulsive, dismissive sentiments from TV pundits and legal experts about the details in the Sean “Diddy” Combs trial in New York, I would donate it to the Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women, to reinvigorate paused funding.
That is because the cultural affinity for survivor diminishment as demonstrated in this case is aligned to the White House administration’s latest reduction of monetary, social, healthcare, housing and legal support for those experiencing domestic violence.
A new survey reveals that a majority of likely voters oppose policies that grant legal rights to fertilized eggs, embryos and fetuses. They also oppose the criminalization of pregnancy loss, denial of emergency medical care and broader threats to reproductive freedom.
Yet here we are, with bills to codify those rights brewing in a quarter of U.S. states this year.
Even when they do not succeed, we cannot simply ignore them or hope their proponents call it quits. Rather, this is a prime opportunity to double down on educating people and harnessing public opinion.
In every issue of Ms., we track research on our progress in the fight for equality, catalogue can’t-miss quotes from feminist voices and keep tabs on the feminist movement’s many milestones. We’re Keeping Score online, too—in this biweekly roundup.
This week:
—California Governor Gavin Newsom stands up to President Trump over ICE raids: “California may be first, but it clearly will not end here. Other states are next. Democracy is next.”
—Trump threatens EMTALA.
—Israeli forces detained Greta Thunberg and 11 other activists while trying to deliver aid to Gaza.
—New research found unintended pregnancies correlate with gender inequality.
—Taylor Swift finally owns her entire music catalog.
… and more.
Survivors of sexual violence, advocates and lawmakers in New York are calling for legislation that would fill key gaps in the state’s law, making it harder for those accused of sexual abuse, harassment and discrimination to sue their accusers for defamation. The legislation also includes a bill that would give people abused in state custody more time to seek justice.
“If New York truly supports survivors, our laws should make justice in civil court more accessible, not less. Survivors should be able to receive monetary compensation that can aid their healing without having to face onerous legal hurdles. The package of bills we’re urging Albany to pass this session will do exactly that,” said Emily Miles, executive director of the New York City Alliance Against Sexual Assault.
One of the many dangers of the budget reconciliation package currently before the Senate is its audacity. It is so large, so ugly and so expensive—nothing beautiful to see here—that it can be hard to know how to fight back.
So much is at risk that, even assuming some of the most talked-about measures, such as Medicaid cuts, are removed or modified in the Senate, it is likely that passage of This Ugliest of Bills (THUG Bill) would still fundamentally harm millions of people.
Children—citizen and non-citizen—are going to be especially hard hit if this ugliest of bills passes.
A would-be king wants a coronation on June 14, a date already laden with meaning: Flag Day, the 250th anniversary of the founding of the U.S. Army, and, yes, Donald J. Trump’s 79th birthday. But this year, Americans are refusing to let the day be co-opted.
Across all 50 states, from big cities to small towns, more than 1,800 events are planned to mark what organizers are calling the “No Kings Day of Defiance.”
While antiabortion extremists work to eliminate mifepristone from the shelves—and the FDA faces mounting antiabortion political pressure to revoke its approval—Illinois lawmakers are fighting back with a legal firewall: a first-of-its-kind bill to keep abortion pills on the market, even if the Trump administration bans them.
The Illinois General Assembly has passed HB 3637, legislation allowing clinicians to prescribe drugs removed from the FDA’s approved list—as long as the World Health Organization still recommends them. Under the bill, Illinois clinicians could continue prescribing and dispensing the abortion medication mifepristone—even if the Trump administration rolls back the FDA’s longstanding approval of the medication. The legislation now awaits the signature of Illinois Governor J.D. Pritzker.
The U.S. ranks as the 19th most dangerous country for women, 11th in maternal mortality, 30th in closing the gender pay gap, 75th in women’s political representation, and painfully lacks paid family leave and equal access to health care. But Ms. has always understood: Feminist movements around the world hold answers to some of the U.S.’s most intractable problems. Ms. Global is taking note of feminists worldwide.
This week: News from South Korea, Mexico, Poland, Australia and more.
Attorneys general of four states—Massachusetts, California, New Jersey and New York—asked the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Thursday, June 5, to lift long-standing restrictions on the medication mifepristone. The drug is used in approximately two-thirds of abortions in the United States.
The petition came just three days after the FDA commissioner Marty Makary announced his decision to “review” the agency’s regulation of mifepristone after previously stating he had no plans to restrict the medication.
“Given mifepristone’s 25-year safety record, there is simply no scientific or medical reason to subject it to such extraordinary restrictions,” said New York Attorney General Letitia James. “New Yorkers, and all Americans, deserve access to this safe, effective and essential medication without burdensome, unjustified restrictions. The FDA must follow the science and lift these unnecessary barriers that put patients at risk and push providers out of care.”