Courts and Judges

Texas Lawmakers Propose Abortion Pill Bill That Can’t Be Challenged in State Courts

In 2021, when Texas passed an abortion ban enforced through private lawsuits, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan sarcastically derided the architects of the law as “some geniuses” who’d found the “chink in the armor” to sidestep Roe v. Wade. Four years later, those same folks are back with a new play to restrict the flow of abortion-inducing drugs into the state and a fresh set of never-before-seen legal tools that experts say would undermine the balance of power in the state.

Senate Bill 2880, which passed the Senate last week, allows anyone who manufactures, distributes, mails, prescribes or provides an abortion-inducing drug to be sued for up to $100,000. It expands the wrongful death statute to encourage family members, especially men who believe their partner had an abortion, to sue up to six years after the event, and empowers the Texas attorney general to bring lawsuits on behalf of “unborn children of residents of this state.”

That the Texas Senate passed a bill to crack down on abortion pills isn’t surprising. But the protections written into this bill, which says the law cannot be challenged as unconstitutional in state court, could have ripple effects far beyond the question of abortion access.

‘This Is About Life or Death’: Leading Feminists Discuss Women’s Rights in Post-Roe America

Clara Bingham, Jamia Wilson and Jessica Valenti on the state of abortion access and the feminist resistance rising up in every state in the U.S.:

“The 14th Amendment is what antiabortion activists are using right now to fight for fetal personhood. Anytime you see the 14th Amendment mentioned, that’s what it’s about.”

“We are no longer first-class citizens in banned states.”

“There are countries in this world where the pro-life movement is the movement that is about choice. … They’re surprised when they hear the framing of pro-life being used to dominate and control women’s bodies.”

“As terrible as things are every single day, in every single community and in every single state, there are rooms full of women, and there are rooms full of activists who are working their asses off, who are using their time, their money, their energy to make sure that if someone needs care, they can get it, whether or not we see it.”

Profiles in Courage: In Defense of Fired Federal Workers, Cathy Harris Took on the Trump Administration—And Won

and

Profiles in Courage is a new series honoring the extraordinary women and men who have transformed American institutions through principled public service. At a time when trust in government is fragile, these stories offer a powerful reminder of what ethical leadership looks like—from those who litigate for civil rights and resign on principle, to those who break military barriers and defend democracy on the front lines.

As chair and board member of the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), Cathy Harris dedicated her leadership to preserving the independence and integrity of the federal civil service, ensuring that government employees are hired, promoted and protected based on merit—not politics.

On President Donald Trump’s first day back in office in 2025, Harris was demoted from her role as chair, and just weeks later, she was fired entirely from the board—a direct violation of the Civil Service Reform Act. Determined to defend the independence of the board and the rights of federal employees, Harris sued the administration … and won.

This Week in Women’s Representation: Women Voters Deliver Win for Canada’s Mark Carney; Latinas Set New Record in U.S. State Legislatures; Federal Job Cuts Threaten the Black Middle Class

Weekend Reading for Women’s Representation is a compilation of stories about women’s representation. 

This week: May milestones include May Day and Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month; the gender gap in Canada’s latest election shows women delivered Carney’s win; Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton may take Sen. Dick Durbin’s place in the Senate; and more.

U.S. Citizen Children Are the Latest Casualty in Trump’s Immigration War

On Friday, a 2-year-old U.S. citizen was deported with “no meaningful process,” according to a federal judge. She’s one of several U.S. citizen children being torn from their home, sent to foreign countries without due process, and stripped of their rights and protection.

This little girl—and all U.S. citizen children of immigrant parents—deserves to be safe from deportation. She needs to know that the people around her love her and want to do what’s best for her. She needs to grow up in a country that wants her to thrive and succeed. She needs to believe that her family and everyone else will be able to count on the government to protect them from harm, and when necessary, to protect her from the government itself. In this moment, that may seem like a tall order, but only if we stand by while abuses like this happen. 

The government has the power to find and return these families. As a former DHS official, I know that deportation planes can be held, individuals can be taken off the manifest, and that officials can find and return people who have been wrongfully deported. It is not a question of resources, or logistics, or diplomatic niceties, or court orders. It’s a question of returning to the idea that immigration law is not a vehicle for expelling one’s enemies, but a set of laws that replicate the fundamental principles of dignity, justice and a fair day in court.

A Historic Win in Wisconsin: What Susan Crawford’s Victory Signals

In a record-breaking election, Wisconsin voters elected liberal judge Susan Crawford to the state Supreme Court, defeating right-wing candidate Brad Schimel in what became the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history. With over $100 million spent, the race became a referendum not just on abortion rights and union protections, but on billionaires like Elon Musk attempting to buy political power. 

Crawford’s win is more than just a victory for Democrats. It is a rebuke of President Trump, aggressive masculinity and right-wing efforts to strip away reproductive freedom. It also marks a turning point in organizing, as voters turned out in force to defend their rights and shape the future of the court.

North Carolina Is Asking People to Vote According to Rules the State Hasn’t Set

Five months out, chaos continues in a state Supreme Court race that was counted, recounted and audited.

On Friday, a state appeals court reopened Pandora’s Box by calling into question more than 60,000 votes cast in North Carolina’s Nov. 5 general election. This gives the Republican candidate, Jefferson Griffin, new hope to close his 734-vote deficit, out of 5,540,090 total votes, against Democratic candidate Allison Riggs.

South Carolina Wants to Block Medicaid Patients From Planned Parenthood. Will SCOTUS Let It?

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, a case that could determine whether Medicaid patients have the right to sue when states deny them access to qualified healthcare providers like Planned Parenthood.

While the legal question is narrow, a ruling in favor of South Carolina could embolden other states to cut off Medicaid funding for reproductive healthcare, disproportionately impacting low-income patients and people of color.

Twenty-Nine States Have a Not-So-Secret Weapon to Fight for Democracy

As the Trump administration’s attacks on women’s rights, reproductive access and LGBTQ equality continue in force, state executive leaders have emerged as potent frontline responders.

Among the tools in states’ arsenals are often underused state-level equal rights amendments (ERAs). Even as the federal ERA remains in limbo, an unlikely bulwark for the next four years—see professor Laurence Tribe’s Contrarian piece explaining its legal status—29 states have some form of an ERA (e.g., broader sex equality language than the U.S. Constitution) written into their constitutions. Several have already been used to advance abortion rights (Pennsylvania, Connecticut and New Mexico); many are broadly worded and inclusive of protection against pregnancy discrimination, age, disability and immigration status. Issues such as pay transparency and addressing gender-based violence also could be bolstered by a state ERA.