Roe v. Wade

Roe v. Wade (1973) was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case affirming the right to abortion and upholding the right to make personal decisions about their family, relationships and bodily autonomy. In a devastating 2022 decision, the Court reversed Roe v. Wade, abandoning almost 50 years of precedent on the fundamental right to privacy. Overturning Roe v. Wade has had catastrophic consequences for people across America, as over a dozen states issued trigger bans.

The Antiabortion Playbook Is Coming for Birth Control

PUBLISHED 6/29/2026 by

The United States is on its way to banning or severely restricting birth control.

I know this statement will be met with incredulity—but I would refer you to the disbelief so many of us in the reproductive health field faced when we warned that the constitutional right to abortion was in danger. Nearly four years later, we are living in this reality that so many dismissed as alarmist fantasy.

If the anti-contraception tactics we see today look extremely familiar, it’s because they come straight from the antiabortion playbook: spreading mis- and disinformation, advancing incremental regressive policies, and denying problems with access—the same tactics that helped pave the way for the eventual overturning of Roe.

A Case for Court Reform

PUBLISHED 6/18/2026 by

For generations, Americans have expanded the meaning of “We, the People”—not because our institutions did it on their own, but because ordinary people demanded it.

From U.S. Rep. Barbara Jordan’s powerful reminder that the Constitution did not originally include everyone, to the hard-fought victories that secured civil rights, voting rights and reproductive freedom, our democracy has always depended on people pushing institutions to live up to their promises.

Today, the Supreme Court stands at the center of that struggle.

While courts remain an essential safeguard against abuses of power, public confidence in the Court has eroded amid ethics concerns, increasing politicization and decisions that have narrowed rights and weakened democratic protections.

If the Court is to serve as a guardian of liberty for future generations, it must be willing to change—through reforms that promote accountability, transparency and greater public trust.

As the nation marks its 250th anniversary, we should remember that our institutions are not fixed. The Constitution was designed to evolve, and the Court has changed before in response to the demands of the American people. Whether through term limits, stronger ethics rules or other structural reforms, the question is not whether the Court can change, but whether we will insist that it does.

A democracy that truly serves all of us depends on nothing less.

(This is part of a new series FEMINIST 250: Democracy’s Feminist Future, a special Ms. series examining the next chapter of U.S. democracy through a feminist lens. As the nation approaches its 250th anniversary, the series explores how women and marginalized communities have shaped democratic progress, what lessons history offers for the challenges ahead, and how a more inclusive, representative and equitable democracy can be built for the next 250 years.)

Abortion Rates Continue to Climb as Telehealth Reshapes Post-Dobbs America

PUBLISHED 6/17/2026 by

Four years after Dobbs, a striking reality has emerged: Abortion bans have not eliminated the need for abortion.

Instead, new #WeCount data show that abortions have increased nationwide, driven in large part by the rapid expansion of telehealth and abortion pills by mail.

Even in states that have attempted to ban abortion entirely, patients continue to find ways to obtain care through shield-law providers, telehealth services and community-based networks.

The data also reveal how dramatically abortion care has changed. Telehealth now accounts for more than a quarter of all abortions provided within the formal healthcare system, offering many patients a safer, more affordable and more private alternative to in-person care.

For people living under bans and severe restrictions, it has become an essential lifeline—one that has reshaped where and how abortion care is delivered across the country.

Yet the numbers likely tell only part of the story. As antiabortion politicians and the Trump administration target mifepristone and telehealth abortion, providers are already adapting.

The lesson of the post-Dobbs era is clear: The demand for abortion has not disappeared, and despite relentless efforts to restrict it, people continue to find ways to access the care they need.

Latin American Feminists Train U.S.-Based Doulas on New Mifepristone Protocol for Second-Trimester Abortions

PUBLISHED 6/5/2026 by

As Republicans create ever higher barriers to abortion that push abortion seekers later into pregnancy, U.S.-based activists are learning from Latin American feminists who have developed protocols to make second-trimester medication abortion easier and safe: using a double-dose mifepristone protocol for pregnancies 17 weeks of gestation and longer.

For second-trimester abortions, taking two mifepristone means needing less misoprostol, which eases painful contractions and shortens the time to uterine expulsion.

Whereas mifepristone’s side effects are mild—mainly headaches and some nausea that can be treated with medications—misoprostol causes diarrhea, chills and vomiting, which are much harder to experience. Using two mifepristone also significantly reduces the period of painful contractions—from 15 to 18 hours, to often less than six hours, which is critical for women who have to work or care for children or relatives.

Supported women have expressed great satisfaction with the process.

People seek abortion care later in pregnancy for the same reasons they do early in pregnancy, said Erika Christensen, cofounder of Patient Forward, which works to eliminate barriers to abortion care later in pregnancy and provides resources on how find later abortion care—but many are not able to access care as soon as they would like. “This could be because they learned a piece of new information later in their pregnancy, like a health threat to themselves or to the fetus, a new extenuating life circumstance, or it could be the new information could be that they’re pregnant.”

A (Brief) History of Women’s Rights, 1600 to Present

PUBLISHED 6/3/2026 by and

From the Haudenosaunee women who successfully challenged warfare in the 17th century, to today’s feminist organizers defending democracy, reproductive freedom and civil rights, the struggle for women’s equality has never been a straight line. It is a story of persistence, resistance and collective action spanning centuries.

Compiled by editors at Ms. and researchers from the National Women’s History Alliance, this women’s history timeline traces the interconnected histories of feminism, abolition, labor organizing, civil rights, reproductive justice, LGBTQ+ liberation and democratic participation.

No timeline can fully capture more than 400 years of feminist history, let alone every movement, leader, victory and setback that has shaped the ongoing fight for equality. Rather than offering a comprehensive account, this chronology highlights pivotal moments and turning points that help tell the story of how women have expanded the boundaries of freedom, democracy and human rights in the United States and beyond.

The timeline is part of Ms. magazine’s FEMINIST 250: Founding Feminists project, a multimedia essay series marking the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence by examining the women and feminist movements that have worked to make the nation’s founding promises more fully realized. Through reported features, essays, interviews and historical analysis, FEMINIST 250 explores not only where we have been, but where we must go next to achieve true equality.

FEMINIST 250’s Parts 2 and 3—Feminist Lessons and Feminist Futures—drop this month on MsMagazine.com.

Conservative Justices Resurrect the Comstock Act, Threatening Abortion Access Nationwide

PUBLISHED 5/21/2026 by

On May 1, the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the mailing of mifepristone, one of the most widely used abortion medications in the country, threatening access for patients already facing a shrinking number of clinics nationwide. Although the Supreme Court temporarily stayed the ruling earlier this month, Justice Clarence Thomas’ dissent revealed something even more alarming: a renewed effort to resurrect the Comstock Act, a 19th-century anti-obscenity law once used to criminalize the mailing of abortion- and contraception-related materials.

The Comstock Act’s history is deeply tied to censorship, moral policing and attacks on marginalized communities. Under its broad and subjective definition of “obscenity,” authorities targeted contraception, abortion information, sexual health materials, queer literature and even works of classical art. Its reproductive restrictions disproportionately harmed poor and working-class women, who were often cut off from the safest and most affordable forms of care.

Today, antiabortion activists are once again looking to Comstock as a tool to restrict abortion nationwide—this time through the courts. Thomas’ explicit invocation of the law in the mifepristone fight signals how far-right legal movements are attempting to revive long-discredited morality laws to roll back reproductive freedom and other established rights.

The Fifth Circuit Proves Abortion Is on the Ballot this November

PUBLISHED 5/7/2026 by | UPDATED 5/22/2026 at 9:31 A.M. PT

A highlight of being in Ireland has been following the local news, especially the robust abortion beat: Irish lawmakers have been waging a loud fight to expand abortion rights—in particular, to ensure unnecessary waiting periods don’t impede access to care.

Breaking headlines from the United States were a dark juxtaposition.

The U.S. is one of only four nations worldwide actively rolling back reproductive rights.

And now we’re threatened with yet another fight: The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling late last week aiming to create the most significant setback to abortion access since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision four years ago.

The three-member panel, two of whom are Trump appointees, blocked a 2023 FDA policy allowing mifepristone to be prescribed by telehealth providers and delivered by mail—a decision that applies to all states, whether abortion is legal or not, and where voters have mobilized to pass ballot measures and enshrine reproductive rights in their state constitutions.

This Fifth Circuit ruling is not the final word on the case. The two pharmaceutical companies that make mifepristone, Danco and GenBioPro, immediately filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court. On Monday, Justice Samuel Alito announced an administrative stay through May 11, meaning the decision is on hold until at least then, while the justices review the appeal and decide whether the medically unnecessary in-person dispensing requirements can be reimposed for the duration of the litigation.

In the spirit of the fighting Irish, readers should take heart that the community of U.S. abortion providers, advocates and support networks “have shown amazing resilience and tenacity since the Dobbs decision,” according to Kelly Baden of Guttmacher. “They will continue to do what they can do to ensure that everyone, regardless of where they live, can access the abortion care they need.”

So, for now, our citizen mobilization strategy must be twofold: Support those who directly deliver those services and get ready to get loud. The abortion fight shows that access to healthcare, the integrity of science, the rules of democracy, and the right to bodily autonomy are not only all interconnected, but they are all on the ballot this November.

Tennessee Tries to Silence Women Nearly Killed by Its Abortion Ban: ‘We Will Have Our Day in Court,’ Pledges Lead Plaintiff

PUBLISHED 5/6/2026 by

Tennessee was supposed to face nine women in court on April 27 in a closely watched trial over the state’s abortion ban—women who say they were denied emergency care, forced to flee the state for abortions, or pushed to the brink of death after suffering catastrophic pregnancy complications. After waiting nearly three years to testify publicly about what happened to them, the plaintiffs were prepared to finally take the stand.

Then, less than two business days before the trial was set to begin, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti (yes, the same Skrmetti whose name is now attached to the Supreme Court’s landmark anti-trans healthcare ruling) filed an appeal invoking a newly enacted state law which prevents Tennesseans from suing over any state law that harms them. The move stripped the court of jurisdiction over the case, abruptly halting the proceedings and potentially delaying the trial for months or years.

“We should be in court today standing up to Tennessee’s abortion ban,” the Center for Reproductive Rights said in a statement after the cancellation. “These women deserve their day in court. But Tennessee politicians refuse to listen.”

Among the plaintiffs is Allie Phillips, who says she was forced to travel to New York for an abortion after learning her fetus had a fatal diagnosis and that continuing the pregnancy put her own life at risk. By the time she arrived for care, she learned the fetus had already died in utero, placing her at heightened risk of infection and blood clots.

Phillips shares her story and reaction to the canceled trial, in her own words.

“I would have testified about how I would have risked my future fertility and my life if I had stayed pregnant in Tennessee. … I already had a 6-year-old daughter, Adalie, to raise. She needed me to live and be her mom. …

“We’re appealing. We don’t know how it will take but even if it’s five years, we will have our day in court. I’m not going anywhere.”

Trump’s Budget Plunders Birth Control and Reproductive Health Programs—With Open Derision for Americans Who Need Them

PUBLISHED 4/30/2026 by

Title X is the federal program that funds family planning and reproductive health services nationwide—and under President Donald Trump’s proposed budget for 2027, it would be effectively eliminated, reshaping access to care for women across the country.

What is perhaps most jarring, on close reading, is not only what the budget proposes, but how it speaks. The language throughout the administration’s budget and HHS documents departs from traditional bureaucratic norms, adopting a tone that is at times openly mocking and vilifying. Programs serving women, LGBTQ people and marginalized communities are described in terms that signal not just opposition, but disdain. It is a stark reminder that federal budgets do more than allocate resources—they reflect who this government is for, and who it is not.

(This essay is part of an ongoing Ms. series examining the real-world impact of President Donald Trump’s proposed fiscal year 2027 budget. Across sectors—from healthcare and childcare to immigration enforcement and food assistance—the series explores what the administration’s funding priorities reveal about who government serves, and who it leaves behind.)

‘The Other Roe’ Film Shines a Light on Forgotten Abortion-Rights Case Doe v. Bolton

PUBLISHED 4/15/2026 by

On June 24, 2026, we’ll reach the fourth anniversary of the Supreme Court’s infamous Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. This year, which would have been Roe’s 53rd anniversary, also coincides with the United States’ 250th, reminding us that while the U.S. has been independent since 1776, American women are still far from having full rights and power over our own bodies.

Roe v. Wade, which passed in 1973 and stood for 49 years, gets most of the credit for establishing the national right to abortion. Many people think of Roe as the first big bookend ushering in the right to abortion in the U.S., with Dobbs as the other bookend taking that right away again.

However, Roe wasn’t the only groundbreaking case that paved the way for abortion rights in the U.S. 

Doe v. Bolton, Roe v. Wade’s lesser-known companion case, was argued before the Supreme Court in 1973 the same day as Roe and was equally crucial to abortion rights in the United States.