​​What’s at Stake in Louisiana v. Callais—and Why it Matters for Women

For nearly 60 years, the Voting Rights Act has been the foundation of representative democracy in the United States, ensuring that all communities—regardless of race or background—have a fair chance to elect leaders who reflect their experiences and priorities. Today, that foundation is being tested. The Supreme Court’s consideration of Louisiana v. Callais challenges Section 2 of the VRA, a crucial safeguard against discriminatory maps and election practices that dilute the voices of communities of color.

When these protections are strong, women of color are more likely not only to participate in elections but to win them—bringing new perspectives, policies and leadership into government. Weakening Section 2 would have ripple effects far beyond redistricting: It would silence voices that have been historically excluded from power, particularly those of women whose civic leadership has long strengthened our democracy.

As RepresentWomen’s research shows, Louisiana already lags behind much of the country in women’s political representation. Rolling back Section 2 would not only harm communities of color—it would jeopardize fragile gains toward gender parity and threaten the progress that brings our democracy closer to true representation.

A New Supreme Court Term Brings Familiar Trouble

The Supreme Court’s 2025–’26 term opens under the shadow of the Trump administration’s growing influence over the judiciary. Last term, the Court issued 140 emergency rulings—many of them unsigned—compared to just 55 full opinions. These “shadow docket” decisions often favored the Trump administration, even in cases where the stakes included the rights of transgender people, immigrants and federal employees.

Now, with several Trump-backed cases on the merits docket, legal experts Michele Goodwin and Steven Vladeck warn that the Court’s deference to presidential power could deepen.

From conversion therapy bans to voting rights and gender-affirming care, the consequences of this term’s decisions will reverberate far beyond the courtroom.

Keeping Score: Trump’s Dangerous Claims About Tylenol; Government Shutdown Begins; Diddy’s Four-Year Sentence

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:
—Doctors push back against Trump’s dangerous claims that Tylenol in pregnancy increases the risk of autism.
—The U.S. entered a government shutdown, affecting millions of federal workers.
—Sean “Diddy” Combs was sentenced to four years in prison.
—Zoologist and anthropologist Jane Goodall died at age 91.
—University of California students and faculty are suing the Trump administration for violating free speech rights.
—Student activists are stepping up to get around birth control bans on campus.
—Louisiana admits non-citizens voting is not a systemic problem.
—The ACLU and religious freedom organizations are suing to block 14 more Texas school districts from implementing a law requiring classrooms to display Ten Commandments posters.

… and more.

The Abortion Pill That Transformed Medicine Is Under Attack

By approving mifepristone (the first pill in the two-step medication abortion regimen), the Food and Drug Administration gave people access to one of the safest, most effective and most studied medications in modern medicine.

Yet despite overwhelming evidence and broad public support, there are relentless attempts to restrict access to mifepristone. In 2023, a coalition led by extremist antiabortion groups filed a lawsuit seeking to roll back the FDA’s approval of the drug (which the Supreme Court ultimately dismissed). But the attacks have continued, fueled by a dangerous belief that science is optional.

We’ve seen it with COVID vaccines. We’ve seen it with birth control. We’ve seen it in lawsuits claiming Tylenol causes autism. We’ve even seen people question milk pasteurization and folic acid in prenatal vitamins—two of the most basic public health measures we have. The through line is the same: Ignore the evidence, stir up doubt and leave patients to bear the consequences.

From Berlin to Beijing to U.S. Congress, Women’s Courage to Convene Propels Us Forward

Weekend Reading for Women’s Representation is a compilation of stories about women’s representation in politics, sports and entertainment, judicial offices and the private sector—with a little gardening mixed in!

This week:
—We mark 60 years since former President Lyndon Johnson advanced equal opportunity in employment.
—When women come together, share our strength, and lift one another up, the impossible becomes possible. 
—In a landslide victory, Adelita Grigalva becomes Arizona’s first Latina to Congress.
—Of the four Republican House members signing the petition about the actions and allies of sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein, three are women.
—A record number of U.S. legislators won’t run for reelection next year.
—Hillary Clinton “sees a dangerous moment for women’s rights and democracy.”
—Akshi Chawla, who writes the #WomenLead Substack and is a valuable resource on international women’s representation, on the great question: “How do I get started?”
—The Marshall Islands, a rapidly vanishing Oceania nation, is led by the region’s first-ever woman president, Hilda Heine.
—Who was the first American woman to have an airport named in her honor?

… and more.

The Antiabortion Movement’s Decades-Long Goal Achieved: Planned Parenthood Defunded

Republicans have finally achieved a decades-long goal: defunding Planned Parenthood. In July, President Trump signed a spending bill that blocks Medicaid reimbursements and federal grants for nonprofit health centers that provide abortions—including Planned Parenthood—even though federal law already prohibits Medicaid from covering abortion. The result is that more than a million low-income and disabled patients who rely on Planned Parenthood for contraception, STI testing, and cancer screenings can no longer use their insurance there. Hundreds of clinics across the country are expected to close, and in many communities, there are no alternatives waiting to replace them.

What does this mean in practice?

It means people like Colleen—who discovered she had breast cancer because of an affordable visit to Planned Parenthood—will face new barriers to care.

It means patients who already struggle to cover basic expenses will be asked to pay out-of-pocket for lifesaving services.

And it means thousands of people living in rural or medically underserved areas may have no nearby provider at all.

The political fight over Planned Parenthood has always been framed as a battle about abortion, but the immediate impact is much broader: fewer clinics, fewer screenings, and fewer chances to catch disease before it’s too late.