Women in Politics

Ms. spotlights stories of women making political change by holding office and pioneering legislation all over the world, from the local to the federal level—despite the sex discrimination they often face in their positions.

Mifepristone, Mail-In Voting and the Midterms Are All on the Line

PUBLISHED 8/22/2026 by

Trump has officially nominated Dr. Heidi Overton as the FDA commissioner. Overton previously called the abortion pill “telebortion,” and called on Congress to strictly regulate it.

With the FDA currently reevaluating its approval of mifepristone and its regulations permitting providers to mail the medication, Overton’s nomination represents yet another challenge to mifepristone’s widespread usage—accounting for over two-thirds of all abortions, including in states with bans. Not to mention the fact that Overton also recently appeared next to Trump during a press conference in which he spouted dangerous misinformation about childhood vaccines.

Asking for a friend: Will the physician in the Senate who holds a key vote on the Health Committee cave again?

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court might be on summer break—but its shadow docket is still up and running. And nothing is certain before this Supreme Court, which has committed itself to expanding Trump’s executive powers.

Thanks to SCOTUS and state legislators’ rollback of many fundamental rights, state supreme court races have been receiving increased attention, and attracted significant outside spending.

‘It’s Killing the Women You Represent’: Texas Widower’s Plea to Lawmakers to End Abortion Ban

PUBLISHED 8/21/2026 by

After his 35-year-old wife bled to death from a miscarriage in a Houston-area hospital, a Texas father is suing—and taking her story to Capitol Hill.

“Choosing to bring new life into the world shouldn’t be a death sentence,” insisted Michelle Maloney, the San Antonio attorney working to bring justice to Texas widower Hope Ngumezi and his two young sons.

Three years ago, in June 2023, Hope’s beloved wife Porsha was happily expecting the couple’s third child until she began to miscarry at 11 weeks pregnant. The healthy 35-year-old finance manager for a charter school went to the emergency room at Houston Methodist Sugar Land Hospital, just 10 minutes from her home in suburban Houston.

Both she and Hope were certain that she would receive the safe and critical medical care that she needed as she passed fetal tissue and blood clots the size of grapefruits at the hospital. An ultrasound confirmed that she had partially miscarried and that her fetus no longer had a heartbeat. But the heavy bleeding didn’t stop.

Still, the hospital’s OB-GYN, who examined her just once, moved Porsha from the ER—where staff were equipped to respond to emergencies—to a regular floor, where she received less monitoring. Porsha arrived at the hospital at 3:37 p.m. By 2 a.m., she began gasping for air and within minutes, she had died of hemorrhage.

A dozen doctors who reviewed her medical records for ProPublica, which broke the story about her death, said that Porsha should have urgently received a very simple and standard procedure for a miscarriage—a D&C (dilation and curettage). The 10-15 minute D&C would have removed all remaining fetal tissue in her womb, which her uterus was trying to expel with heavy contractions and bleeding. The procedure would have stopped the bleeding.

“The poor thing bled to death for lack of a D&C. It’s atrocious,” Austin OB-GYN Nancy Binford told Courier Texas.

Care Is Becoming America’s Strongest Form of Resistance

PUBLISHED 8/20/2026 by and

This midterm season, as courts and legislatures chip away at who gets to have a voice in our elections and governance, shoring up our democratic infrastructure is more important than ever. An unlikely tool in the arsenal of democracy? Care.

When Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids intensified in Minnesota this year, fear spread through neighborhoods almost overnight. Families stopped going to work. Parents kept children home. Immigrant-owned businesses lost customers. Communities began retreating from public life.

Organizers responded quickly with a clear request. They asked people to care for one another.

Moms especially jumped in, providing rides to school, groceries delivered to families afraid to leave home, emergency rent assistance, childcare and meals. Neighbors checked in on each other. They created secure networks to communicate needs and organize responses.

They also reveal something much bigger. Minnesota is becoming a case study in what communities across the country are confronting as federal policies reshape daily life.

While federal policy creates these structural hurdles, the Minnesota model proves they are not insurmountable. But Minnesota offers another lesson. The same networks of care that help families survive also help communities organize. When people know one another through acts of mutual support, they build relationships that make collective action possible. They become more likely to solve problems together, advocate together and defend one another when public institutions fall short.

From North Carolina to Wisconsin, State Supreme Courts Are Political Battlegrounds

PUBLISHED 8/19/2026 by

Across the U.S., recent federal rollbacks of rights have led to a rising awareness of the importance of state courts. These once under-the-radar races are increasingly attracting attention within and beyond state borders—and bringing in significant outside spending. Each state has its own constitution and high court to interpret it, giving state courts enormous influence over individual rights.

That influence has become especially clear since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022, as advocates have increasingly turned to state courts for protections on abortion rights, voting rights, redistricting and other civil liberties. The most recent cycle of judicial elections was the most expensive ever.

Now, 32 states are holding state supreme court elections in 2026, with 63 of the nation’s 344 state supreme court seats up for election. The outcomes could alter the ideological makeup of courts in states currently in play and lay the groundwork for future shifts in control.

This November, money, turnout and heightened attention to once-obscure judicial races will collide across the country—and help determine the reach of fundamental rights for years to come.

In the pivotal electoral battleground state of North Carolina, Justice Anita Earls’ campaign to hold onto her state Supreme Court seat has been called “one of the most important races in the state” by the North Carolina AFL-CIO, and “one of the most-watched statewide races in this year’s midterm elections,” per Axios. Earls is currently the only Black justice on the North Carolina Supreme Court. Before beginning her tenure in 2019, she was a civil rights attorney focused on voting rights, education, employment, criminal law and First Amendment issues.

The Same People Policing AOC’s Fertility Want to Police Abortion, Too

PUBLISHED 8/17/2026 by

If you’ve seen Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s posts about freezing her eggs on Instagram, you’ve likely heard about the backlash she’s facing from folks who have called her, at turns, hypocritical, insincere, selfish and, at 36, too old to be a mother.

Funny how we didn’t hear such outcry about age when Jon Hamm announced around the same time that he’s becoming a father at 55. Or when Alec Baldwin, Robert De Niro and Al Pacino—and believe me, I could go on—welcomed new children at 64, 79 and 83. Or when Second Lady Usha Vance, at 40, announced earlier this year that she was expecting.

None of us deserve an explanation from AOC about why she is making the choice she is making. That’s the whole point: It’s her choice, and we have the right to make the choices we want about our bodies and our reproductive lives. Full stop.

And there’s power in talking about it, on our terms. That’s why so many women are feeling seen and reflected in AOC’s posts, and why it’s so empowering to have her make this decision out loud.

Detaining Families, Policing Pregnancy: Trump’s Immigration Crackdown on Women and Children

PUBLISHED 8/12/2026 by

Trump’s latest attacks on birthright citizenship are part of a much broader effort to police American identity, punish migrant women for entering the U.S. and ultimately regulate their reproduction. Immigrant women and children remain particular targets of a hostile immigration system that seeks to control them through detention, family separation and deportation. The administration’s reinstatement of family detention has made it possible to incarcerate whole families while avoiding the political backlash generated by the “zero tolerance” separations of Trump’s first term.

But detaining families together does not make detention humane. Family residential facilities expose mothers and children to interrupted medical care, inadequate health screenings, poor living conditions and lasting physical and psychological harm. Women—particularly those who are pregnant, postpartum or caring for young children—also face heightened vulnerability to neglect and abuse inside a system where government officers and private contractors wield enormous power over their daily lives.

These policies are not simply about immigration enforcement. They are a means of penalizing pregnancy, motherhood and family formation in immigrant communities. From attacks on birthright citizenship to the detention of pregnant women and U.S.-citizen children, the administration is using the immigration system to make migration more painful and precarious—and to enact that punishment on the bodies and families of migrant women.

Another Blow to Women’s Equality at Work: The Trump Administration Is Trying to Weaken a Key Workplace Discrimination Protection

PUBLISHED 8/6/2026 by

The Trump administration is attempting to weaken one of the nation’s most important workplace discrimination protections—a legal standard that has, for decades, allowed workers to challenge hiring and promotion policies that unfairly exclude qualified people, even when those policies appear neutral on their face.

A new opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), issued in June, argues these longstanding interpretations of Title VII’s “disparate-impact” standard are unconstitutional, and contends certain Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidance improperly allows employers to be held liable based on discriminatory effects rather than intent. The opinion is meant to guide executive branch enforcement.

Civil rights advocates are pushing back, arguing the new OLC opinion misstates decades of Supreme Court precedent and congressional action.

Below is a joint explainer—issued by the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), Democracy Forward, the Legal Defense Fund (LDF), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Asian Americans Advancing Justice (AAJC), Equal Rights Advocates, and LatinoJustice PRLDEF—originally published as “The Office of Legal Counsel’s Opinion on the ‘Constitutionality of Disparate-Impact Liability Under Title VII’: What You Need to Know.”

The organizations argue that the opinion does not change federal law. Instead, they emphasize that only Congress can amend Title VII and that courts—not the executive branch—determine how the law is interpreted. Employers, they say, remain legally obligated to comply with existing anti-discrimination protections.

“Across America, workers are struggling to find living-wage jobs to support themselves and their families. Too often, qualified workers are blocked from getting hired and promoted due to employer policies that screen out applicants based on factors unrelated to whether the applicant could do the job, from unnecessary college degree requirements and credit checks to commute-radius limitations and AI resume reviews. The Trump-Vance administration is making this problem worse.

“For decades, under Supreme Court precedent, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), and other legal authority, workers have been able to challenge exclusionary policies like these using a legal tool known as “disparate-impact liability.” That tool has resulted in employers adopting more thoughtful, rigorous standards in evaluating their own selection criteria and advancing their business objectives. The administration is now attacking this tool, encouraging employers to ignore the harms caused by their own policies while denying workers the ability to question whether those policies are justified and fair.

“In its latest move, the Trump-Vance administration’s Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) released an opinion claiming that longstanding U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidance on disparate-impact liability under Title VII is unconstitutional. The OLC opinion is wrong on the facts and wrong on the law. Only Congress and the courts have authority to change the law or its impact.”

A Decade After Hillary Clinton’s Historic Presidential Run, the DNC Is Fighting Over Ranked-Choice Voting

PUBLISHED 8/1/2026 by

Weekend Reading on Women’s Representation is a compilation of stories about women’s representation in politics, on boards, in sports and entertainment, in judicial offices and in the private sector in the U.S. and around the world—with a little gardening and goodwill mixed in for refreshment!

—Ten years ago this week, Hillary Clinton became the first woman to secure a major party’s nomination for president. Eight years later, Kamala Harris walked up to that same door and secured her own party’s nomination.
—The data is convincing: Ranked-choice voting helps level the electoral playing field for women by weakening the control of gatekeepers and incentivizing more civil and collaborative campaigns. RCV has additional benefits too, such as its clear value for political parties to nominate more unifying candidates, as recently demonstrated in Maine’s Democratic gubernatorial primary won handily by Democrat Hannah Pingree after she trailed in first choices. That’s why I was so enraged to learn that the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) has voted to block state parties from making use of RCV to select a nominee.
—Rest in power, Ida Schmertz, co-founder of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers. who described herself as “a feminist before I knew the word.”

… and more.

Never Surrender: Empowered Wives Were Never the Problem

PUBLISHED 7/31/2026 by

Over the past year, several women-focused articles in the New York Times declared feminism has gone too far, and put the onus on women to fix what is broken.

An article asking if liberal feminism “ruined the workplace” broke the internet late last year.

An article last month featured a conversation with influential, right-wing columnist Louise Perry, about how women need to change, in order to close the growing gap between men and women. Perry’s position justifies re‑inscribing patriarchal control over women’s bodies and sexuality in the name of “protecting” us.

I feel a familiar sense of disappointment in the recent feature, “Women Are Too Controlling, She Wrote. Her Message Still Resonates,” about Laura Doyle, author of The Surrendered Wife, a 2001 self‑help book and the basis for a relationship “movement” that teaches women to relinquish control in their marriages, defer to their husbands’ decisions (including finances), and focus on their own “self‑care” and gratitude to restore intimacy and harmony.

Each article asks a version of the same question: How should women change?

Doyle’s message and the broader “surrendered wife” ideology, is troubling.

What struck me even more was that one of the country’s most influential newspapers presented it as a growing cultural trend, without examining the cultural forces and gender expectations that have long reinforced this ideology.

Women and feminism don’t need to surrender. They were never the problem.    

War on Women Report: Hegseth Blocks Promotions of Women in Navy; Trump Finally Pays E. Jean Carroll; Colorado Police Pray With Abortion Clinic Harassers

PUBLISHED 7/31/2026 by and

MAGA Republicans are back in the White House, and Project 2025 is their guide: the right-wing plan to turn back the clock on women’s rights, remove abortion access, and force women into roles as wives and mothers in the “ideal, natural family structure.”

We know an empowered female electorate is essential to democracy. That’s why day after day, we stay vigilant in our goals to dismantle patriarchy at every turn. We are watching, and we refuse to go back. This is the War on Women Report.

Since our last report:
—Celebrity women are 3.5 times more likely than men to be deepfaked.
—The Department of Health and Human Services abruptly canceled $68 million in federal grants under the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program.
—Planned Parenthood clinics regained access to millions of dollars in essential federal funding. The temporary ban was originally approved in July 2025 as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The denial of federal funding over the past year forced Planned Parenthood to close nearly 30 health centers nationwide, impacting roughly 40,000 patients. Despite regaining an estimated $800 million in annual federal funding, ongoing financial uncertainty at both the state and federal levels means the shuttered clinics will not reopen.
—Maine U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner has suspended his campaign after a former girlfriend accused him of raping her nearly five years ago.
—For the first time in a decade, no active-duty women naval officers will be promoted to admiral this year.
—Police officers in Boulder, Colo., were photographed pausing to pray with antiabortion protestors harassing the RISE Collective, an all-trimester abortion clinic, after concerned RISE Collective staff alerted the police of the protestors’ presence.
—Abortion-rights organizers in Idaho have been working to collect signatures for a proposed ballot measure that would restore abortion rights in the state, revoking Idaho’s total ban. On July 2, volunteers gathered in Boise to turn in over 110,000 signatures they collected for the initiative (called the Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act). About one-quarter are from registered Republicans, demonstrating support for abortion rights is widespread even in deep red states.

… and more.