Tag: Courts and Judges

Texas’ Voter Suppression Law Is on Trial

and

Civil rights groups and voting organizations are in federal court challenging a Texas law that makes it harder to vote, especially for people of color and those with disabilities. Over the course of the trial, which goes until late October, counsel will show how Senate Bill 1 violates the Constitution, the Voting Rights Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. 

While SB 1 is one of many anti-democracy laws enacted by 19 states in the year after the 2020 election, it stands out for its sheer number of restrictive and discriminatory provisions, which largely target Latino and Black voters. This is likely the only challenge to such an extensive restrictive voting law that will go to trial between now and the 2024 election. 

How Texas Plans to Trap Abortion Seekers

Anti-abortion activists and elected officials hope to keep abortion seekers walled in within the borders of their home states.

Today, Texas is home to approximately 50 sanctuary cities, and they have expanded into six other states, including the dreaded border state of New Mexico, which the Guttmacher Institute ranks as “very protective” of abortion rights, as well as the “protective” state of Illinois. If the campaign succeeds, those seeking cross-border abortion services may find their path out from under Texas’ draconian ban an increasingly risky one, especially if trafficking is defined to include the provision of financial assistance. 

Mexican Supreme Court Decriminalizes Abortion Nationwide, Requires Federal Health Services to Offer Abortion

The Mexican Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday, Sept. 6, that national laws prohibiting abortion are unconstitutional and violate women’s rights. The sweeping decision entirely removed abortion from the federal penal code. The ruling also required the federal public health service and all federal health institutions to offer abortion to anyone who requests it. In a statement, Mexico’s Supreme Court said the “criminalization of abortion constitutes an act of gender-based violence and discrimination, as it perpetuates the stereotype that women and people with the capacity to get pregnant can only freely exercise their sexuality to procreate and reinforces the gender role that imposes motherhood as a compulsory destiny.”

The increased access to abortion in Mexico stands in stark contrast to decreasing access in the United States, where 14 states now ban abortion entirely and another eight states ban abortion early in pregnancy.

We Need Courageous Leaders Who Stand Up to Anti-Abortion Extremists

Our political leaders must stand up to the intimidation tactics of the anti-abortion movement. They must not cower when faced with blood-soaked letters, condemnations to damnation or threats of frivolous lawsuits. If we cave in to their tactics, we embolden them. Now more than ever before, we need courageous leaders at the national, state and local levels of government who will stand up to anti-abortion bullies.

Keeping Score: Montana Judge Rules Climate Change Denial Harms Young People; S.C. Court Upholds Near-Total Abortion Ban; Interest in Women’s Sports Sets New World Record

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: At least 20 states have enacted some kind of ban on transgender care for minors; appeals judge tries to overturn FDA approval of mifepristone; Democrats urge Biden to further pursue student loan forgiveness; three Black residents killed in Jacksonville by white supremacist; educators sue Idaho for banning discussion of abortion in class; FDA approves RSV vaccine for pregnant patients; Montana judge ruled in favor of young environmentalists; South Carolina Supreme Court reinstitutes abortion ban; “when we allow efforts to fight racism to be framed as racism itself, loss of life is not far behind”; and more.

Anti-Abortion Extremists Charged With Breaking Federal Law in Historic Justice Department Conviction

On Tuesday, a federal jury convicted five anti-abortion defendants of federal civil rights offenses in connection with a reproductive healthcare clinic invasion and blockade in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 22, 2020. According to the Department of Justice, defendants were each convicted of a felony conspiracy against rights and Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act offense. Each defendant faces a potential penalty of 11 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of up to $350,000.

The case marks the first time the Justice Department charged anti-abortion activists with a violation of the civil rights conspiracy statute, in conjunction with the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act—a historic moment in the ongoing fight to hold anti-abortion extremists accountable for their unlawful behavior. 

“This important victory vindicates the rights of women, patients and abortion providers across the country,” said duVergne Gaines, director of the Feminist Majority Foundation’s National Clinic Access Project.

California Court Grants Restraining Order Based on Coercive Control

In September 2020, California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed one of the country’s first laws explicitly prohibiting coercive control in intimate partner relationships. On Aug. 10, Vanessa A. Zecher—a judge of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County— entered a permanent restraining order against a man for coercive control domestic abuse. With campaigns for similar laws moving forward in several states, the case gives advocates concrete evidence of how coercive control laws are critical for freeing survivors from the grasp of abusive partners.

“This case is one of the first cases in the United States where coercive control was considered domestic violence in the absence of physical abuse,” said Lisa Fontes, a professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and an expert on coercive control.

“I hope this case gives other victims hope that there is a pathway out,” said the wife’s attorney, Rebekah Frye. “I hope they will recognize that what they may think in their head or heart is normal—that they will realize it’s not. And then hopefully at some point in time, if they choose to leave, there will be a court, an attorney, a professional out there that will help them get out.”

Alabama Defies the Voting Rights Act

Black voters in Alabama won a major victory at the U.S. Supreme Court in June, after the Court ruled that Republican lawmakers violated the Voting Rights Act when they redrew the state’s congressional map after the 2020 census and failed to create a second Black district. If you stopped watching there, you might be forgiven for thinking that Alabama, thoroughly chastened, would have quickly gone about redrawing its congressional map to add a second district “in which Black voters either comprise a voting-age majority or something quite close to it.” But no.

With control of the U.S. House on the line in 2024, Republicans are fighting for every last gerrymandered seat.

Texas’ Last Drag Queen Story Hour

On Saturday morning in Austin, a group of parents, kids and allies gathered for what may be the last drag story hour ever in the state of Texas. A ban on drag performances is slated to take effect on Friday, Sept. 1. Under the law, businesses that host drag shows where minors are present face up to a $10,000 fine per violation, while drag performers and participants face misdemeanor penalties. 

“I want to expose my daughter to this, and make her feel and know that this is completely normal and good, and celebrate diversity,” said a parent at the story hour named Anna.

Another parent, Margie, who is queer herself, said she wished Texas lawmakers understood that drag “is not inherently sexual. Queerness is not inherently a sexual experience. To close kids off from exploring their identity is fascistic.”

Women Are Improving the Federal Bench: Milestones and Historic Firsts

Since 2021, the Senate has confirmed 140 lifetime judges. Two-thirds (94) are women, and more than 40 percent (60) are women of color, including Native American women. At the circuit court level, three-fourths of these confirmed judges are women, and more than half are women of color. (This stands in stark contrast to former President Trump’s appointees, including his nomination of zero Black judges, and just one Latina judge, to federal circuit courts.)

But this progress can’t stop here.

The professional and demographic diversity these judges bring to our federal courts matters. Our diverse nation needs judges who reflect and represent all of us. And we know this: Demographic and professional diversity on our courts has been shown to increase public trust in the judiciary and improve judicial decision-making.