From ‘Love Island’ to Election Day: How Close Is the U.S. to Deciding Elections by Phone?

PUBLISHED 7/10/2026 by and

Five nights a week, millions of Americans vote on Love Island USA with just a few taps on their phones. Yet when Election Day arrives, most still stand in line, mail absentee ballots or travel to polling places. Despite using smartphones to bank, buy homes, file taxes and manage their healthcare, Americans still can’t use them to vote. The contrast raises an increasingly common question: If Americans trust their phones with nearly every other aspect of life, how close are we to trusting them with democracy?

While internet voting already exists in limited form for some military, overseas and disabled voters, expanding it to the broader public remains one of election administration’s most contentious debates. Supporters argue that allowing eligible voters to cast ballots securely from their phones could remove one of the most persistent barriers to participation. Critics counter that convenience cannot come at the expense of election security, warning that no current internet voting system has yet demonstrated the level of security, transparency and public trust required for democratic elections.

Whether Americans will someday choose presidents the same way they choose reality TV winners remains an open question.

Women’s Sports Were Built by Letting Girls In

PUBLISHED 7/9/2026 by

When the Supreme Court upheld West Virginia’s ban on transgender girls participating in girls’ school sports in West Virginia v. B.P.J., it said the ruling was about protecting the safety and fairness of women’s and girls’ sports. I hear that claim against everything I actually lived.

Thirty years ago, in United States v. Virginia, the Supreme Court held that generalizations about “the way women are” cannot justify denying opportunity to women whose talent and capacity place them outside the average description. That principle didn’t just build my generation of athletes. It built a generation of women: the litigators and judges, the surgeons, the CEOs and entrepreneurs, the senators and governors, the police officers and firefighters and fighter pilots, the women who were the first of everything. Every one of those doors was held shut by the same argument Virginia made: Most women wouldn’t want this, most women couldn’t do it.

Women of my generation didn’t fight to be seen as individuals—as athletes, as leaders, as whatever they had it in them to be—only to watch that principle eroded now, in their name and over their objection.

More than half a century ago, this country decided that girls who had been told they didn’t belong on the field belonged there after all. I got to live the proof of that promise. The work now is to keep that promise for every kid who wants to play.

Making Americans Smokers Again: Trump Administration Cuts Anti-Tobacco Programs

PUBLISHED 7/9/2026 by

In May, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported one of the greatest public health victories of the past 50 years. A government survey found that cigarette smoking among U.S. adults dropped to an all-time low of 9 percent in 2025, the first time the smoking rate hit single digits. In the 1970s some 40 percent of U.S. adults smoked daily, as well as 16 percent of teenagers, but a culmination of tobacco taxes, smoking bans and remarkably successful public education campaigns turned around what is still the nation’s largest cause of preventable death. 

Which is why it is so astounding that the Trump administration, despite its stated goal to “make America healthy again,” is rolling back its smoking cessation efforts.

Can You Believe They Put This in Writing? The Wildest Quotes From Heritage’s ‘Project 2026’

PUBLISHED 7/8/2026 by , , , and

The Heritage Foundation has once again taken it upon itself to craft a plan for how to supposedly save America. The report—”Saving America by Saving the Family: A Foundation for the Next 250 Years”—focuses on marriage, family and the American Dream, and has become widely known as “Project 2026,” a follow-up to Heritage’s infamous Project 2025 blueprint.

Project 2025 clocked in at 900 pages; the sequel is around 150. We read the whole thing and pulled out the passages that gave us chills, made us laugh out loud, compelled us to suddenly need to take a long walk and hug our dogs, or inspired another donation to our local abortion fund.

This isn’t intended to be a fact-check or a line-by-line rebuttal. It’s intended to show you how some of the country’s most influential conservative thinkers are talking about feminism, contraception, abortion, LGBTQ+ people, higher education, marriage, motherhood and the role government should play in all of it—because you’re probably too busy to read hundreds of pages of anti-feminist slop.

And because, as former Vice President Kamala Harris famously said about Project 2025: “Can you believe they put that thing in writing?” They did—twice now!

This is the roadmap they’re offering. These documents tell us how their authors understand the country, the family and women’s place in both. We should know what it says.

A Single Abortion Clinic Closing Rarely Makes Headlines. What Happens When None Are Left?

PUBLISHED 7/8/2026 by

Picture a map of the United States. It’s 2022, and in southern states like Texas and Tennessee, there are clusters of black dots that represent independent clinic closures. These are abortion care black holes: communities where it’s no longer possible to get an abortion at a nearby clinic.

Fast forward to present. It’s 2026, four years after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, and black dots have multiplied in states across the country. It no longer matters if the state is red or blue, governed by conservatives or progressives. None are immune to the increasing weight of political pressure, financial strain and operational difficulty that are forcing independent clinics to close or stop providing abortion care.

Each of these black dots is a community suffering a healthcare crisis, and they are proliferating across the United States at a rapid rate.

Independent clinics are often the only places to get clinical abortion care, unbiased information and support for pregnancy options. They are where people go to feel safe and respected, whether they are getting an abortion, continuing a pregnancy or getting gender-affirming care. In small towns and rural spaces, these clinics are often the only safe place for many people, especially those who are LGBTQIA+. If clinics close, there is often nowhere else to go.

And once abortion clinics close, it’s not as simple as reopening when they can, if they can. Even if a specific restriction is lifted, severe financial constraints, continued political hostility, threats of violence and legal uncertainty still stand.

The Mask Is the Message

PUBLISHED 7/7/2026 by

Most of us have seen the photograph by now.

I keep coming back to the masks.

Masks have always carried meaning. A surgeon wears one to protect a patient. Someone recovering from an illness wears one to protect themselves and others. A firefighter wears one to survive long enough to save someone else.

But when someone covers their face while intimidating another person, threatening a community, or committing a crime, the purpose isn’t protection. It’s concealment. It’s a way of saying: I want to do this, but I don’t want anyone to know it was me. That’s why Patriot Front marches with their faces covered.

Federal immigration agents carrying out arrests in public places wear face coverings for the same reasons: They create anonymity. They make accountability harder. They allow participants to disappear back into ordinary life once the march is over. They make denial easier.

I’ve participated in protests and marches over the years alongside hundreds—sometimes thousands—of people. Not one of us wore a mask. We stood behind our words and convictions. We accepted that our names belonged with our beliefs.

The ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ Will Strip Healthcare From Millions—Especially Women and Disabled People

PUBLISHED 7/7/2026 by and

Over 70 million people depend on Medicaid. The Trump administration and members of Congress who constantly turn to the program to make cuts, want you to think that’s a problem. It isn’t—it’s the point.

Every talking point repeated by politicians, amplified by the media and embedded in the rhetoric of those who just voted to gut $1 trillion from the program, is not a policy argument. It’s a cover story. The administration’s story of a typical Medicaid beneficiary is rooted in falsehoods about who is currently supported by the program.

The reality of Medicaid looks like:

… a 59-year-old woman in North Carolina who closed her small business because her eyesight failed, who sorts recyclables at a concert venue when the season allows, who survives on less than $10,000 a year and who relies on Medicaid for arthritis medication and blood pressure care.

Or a 63-year-old woman in Arkansas who spent her career working and now serves as the sole caregiver for her husband with advanced cancer, who is unable to leave him to log the 80 hours a month the federal government will soon demand of her on top of the role she already plays, filling gaps in a system that was already threadbare before it was slashed.

Or a young mom who has been trying for years to find an answer for the rare disease that makes her periodically unable to walk, while struggling to hold down her retail job and care for her kids while waiting months to see specialists.

These are the faces of Medicaid, and this is who HR 1—the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act—and the cuts within it, will harm.

And now, with a new interim final rule from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the situation has gotten measurably worse by an administration going further than Congress intended, leaving states scrambling.

The public comment period on the interim final rule closes July 31, 2026. Make your voice heard today.

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

PUBLISHED 7/7/2026 by

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.”

‘Hands Off Ohio!’: FBI Raid of Voting Rights Group Raises Alarms Over Voter Intimidation

PUBLISHED 7/7/2026 by

On the morning of June 11, agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation raided the Cleveland offices of the Ohio Organizing Collaborative (OOC), a grassroots pro-democracy organization focused on registration, civic engagement and community organizing for marginalized communities.  

According to reports, agents seized documents and computer files and questioned staff members for several hours. Investigators also contacted employees and community leaders at their homes, workplaces and schools. While some agents reportedly carried subpoenas and asked questions related to voter fraud, officials have not publicly explained the specific focus of the investigation.  

The mission of the OOC is to build power among everyday Ohioans through racial, social and economic justice organizing. In the aftermath of the raid, many local leaders and voting rights advocates expressed concern that the investigation could discourage voter registration and civic participation ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

Republicans Are Betting the Fifth Time’s the Charm for the SAVE Act

PUBLISHED 7/6/2026 by | UPDATED 7/7/2026 at 10:52 A.M. PT

After failing to advance in the Senate four separate times in two years and drawing opposition from members of their own party, Republicans are once again attempting to resurrect the SAVE America Act (an even more extreme version of the original SAVE Act)—legislation that would require Americans to provide proof of citizenship, such as a passport or birth certificate, to register to vote.

More than 21 million Americans don’t have ready access to those documents, and married women who have changed their names will face additional hurdles if their birth certificates no longer match their legal names. And all of it is aimed at combating a problem—widespread noncitizen voting—that election officials and researchers have repeatedly debunked.

The renewed push comes at the insistence of President Donald Trump, who has made the legislation one of his top priorities.

Now, at Trump’s insistence, desperate House Republicans are searching for yet another legislative vehicle to move the measure. “The president has [the SAVE America] as a top priority, and so do I,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told Fox News on Sunday. “We’re going to try one more time on a budget reconciliation bill, and I think that will be the way to get it through the Senate, and finally, to the president’s desk.”

Johnson claims he plans to tack SAVE onto the budget reconciliation package, in which Congress sets overall spending and revenue targets for the year—despite the Senate parliamentarian already having blocked this exact move last month: During the “vote-a-rama” on a different reconciliation bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) offered the SAVE Act as an amendment. The parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough determined the legislation could not be included because it violated the Byrd Rule, which limits the reconciliation process (which only requires a simple majority to pass) to provisions primarily related to federal spending and revenue. MacDonough deemed the bill’s core provisions—requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote and imposing new voter registration requirements—as election policy, not budget policy.