
Educators—from pre-kindergarten to college—are planning a teach-in on May 3, to stand in unity across the U.S. against coordinated right-wing attacks on academic freedom. Join us.
On Wednesday, co-chair of the ERA Caucus Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) introduced a “discharge petition” which seeks to compel the House to vote on H.J. Res. 25, a joint resolution to remove the arbitrary deadline for ratification of the ERA and enshrine it in the Constitution as the 28th Amendment.
“Make no mistake—here is the closest we’ve ever been to seeing full equality recognized and equal rights in the Constitution.”
Poetry has always been a powerful tool for women to verbalize their lived experiences and inspire others with their resilience against patriarchal constrictions. As National Poetry Month comes to an end, we’re honoring women poets who defied literary norms, navigated cross-cultural boundaries and revolutionized what we consider poetry.
Dobbs v. Jackson was a clear indication that the Supreme Court will allow states broader latitude to pass laws that discriminate against women. This new reality makes final recognition of the Equal Rights Amendment more important than ever.
(This article originally appears in the Spring 2023 issue of Ms. Join the Ms. community today and you’ll get the issue delivered straight to your mailbox!)
Nearly one in three women have experienced physical violence by an intimate partner. But in 2000, in the case of U.S. v. Morrison, the Supreme Court decided to leave survivors of gender-based violence to this day without the legal tools necessary to sue their attackers for damages or other relief in federal court.
One hundred years ago, women’s rights activists introduced the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to guarantee equal rights for women under the U.S. Constitution. On Thursday, April 27, the Senate will vote on the ERA. Among many other benefits to the law, this vote also represents an opportunity to protect survivors of gender-based violence—which, even in today’s heated political climate, commands bipartisan concern and support.
In 2019, the Supreme Court ruled along political lines that it could not review disputes over partisan gerrymandering. The conservatives in Rucho v. Common Cause insisted that the question of how state legislatures draw their maps is a “political” question and thus “nonjusticiable” by the Court.
The truth is more that the Court silenced the Constitution and set our democracy on a destructive course. As Justice Kagan wrote in the liberals’ dissent, the Court had “encouraged a politics of polarization and dysfunction.” The resulting “unchecked” gerrymanders, she warned, “may irreparably damage our system of government.”
On April 7, in a decision replete with “junk science,” Texas federal district court judge Mathew Kacsmaryk issued an unprecedented ruling revoking the FDA’s 2000 approval of mifepristone. The Supreme Court has since blocked his order while the appeal is pending—a somewhat hopeful sign, beyond the immediate benefit of mifepristone remaining available on the market for now—until there’s a final ruling on the merits of the case. But there is no way of knowing with certainty what the outcome of the case will be, and whether any elements of Kacsmaryk’s decision will remain standing as good law.
We’re still far from the final word on what could ultimately be a legal advance of the religiously inspired ‘abortion regret’ narrative.
The year 2013 saw the worst accident in the history of the international garment industry: A clothing factory collapsed outside of Dhaka, Bangladesh, killing at least 1,127 workers, mostly young women, and injuring another 2,500.
“Ten years later, the anniversary of the Rana Plaza disaster offers an opportunity to reflect on the progress that has been made and the work that still needs to be done to ensure decent conditions for Bangladesh’s more than four million garment workers.”