Work

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.

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.”

I Put My Career on Hold to Raise Five Children and Care for My Disabled Mother. America Depends on Women Like Me.

PUBLISHED 7/28/2026 by

Front & Center amplifies the voices of Black women navigating poverty—highlighting their struggles, resilience and dreams as they care for their families, build careers and challenge systems not built for their success. Now in its fourth year, Front & Center is a collaboration between Ms. and Springboard to Opportunities, a nonprofit based in Jackson, Miss., working alongside residents of federally subsidized housing as they pursue their goals.

Christy is a Jackson, Miss.-based mother of five, family caregiver and entrepreneur. She is caring for her disabled mother while pursuing her dream of one day growing her catering business into a food truck.

“Taking care of my children and my mom at the same time is rewarding, but it is also hard. I really don’t get much help with my kids from their dad, so most of the time I’m here with them.

“What would make caregiving for two generations of family easier, is a break. If my mom had places to go, or if somebody could take her every other weekend or even every weekend sometimes, that would give me time to myself to breathe and live a little bit. My siblings are far away, my car situation makes it hard to get around and I’m always here, so having a little peace would help me and my kids too.

“Childcare vouchers … helped a lot with after-school care and transportation, but when I recently had to recertify, I was cut off because I missed getting a copy of my ID in by the deadline and ended up on a waiting list.”

The ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ Will Strip Healthcare From Millions—Especially Women and Disabled People

PUBLISHED 7/7/2026 by and

Over 70 million people depend on Medicaid. The Trump administration and members of Congress who constantly turn to the program to make cuts, want you to think that’s a problem. It isn’t—it’s the point.

Every talking point repeated by politicians, amplified by the media and embedded in the rhetoric of those who just voted to gut $1 trillion from the program, is not a policy argument. It’s a cover story. The administration’s story of a typical Medicaid beneficiary is rooted in falsehoods about who is currently supported by the program.

The reality of Medicaid looks like:

… a 59-year-old woman in North Carolina who closed her small business because her eyesight failed, who sorts recyclables at a concert venue when the season allows, who survives on less than $10,000 a year and who relies on Medicaid for arthritis medication and blood pressure care.

Or a 63-year-old woman in Arkansas who spent her career working and now serves as the sole caregiver for her husband with advanced cancer, who is unable to leave him to log the 80 hours a month the federal government will soon demand of her on top of the role she already plays, filling gaps in a system that was already threadbare before it was slashed.

Or a young mom who has been trying for years to find an answer for the rare disease that makes her periodically unable to walk, while struggling to hold down her retail job and care for her kids while waiting months to see specialists.

These are the faces of Medicaid, and this is who HR 1—the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act—and the cuts within it, will harm.

And now, with a new interim final rule from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the situation has gotten measurably worse by an administration going further than Congress intended, leaving states scrambling.

The public comment period on the interim final rule closes July 31, 2026. Make your voice heard today.

Revisiting the Speech That Made America See Farmworkers: Dolores Huerta and the Power of Saying, ‘We Exist’

PUBLISHED 7/2/2026 by

In 1965, the National Farm Workers Association announced their decision to join the striking Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee on Sept. 16—Mexican Independence Day. The choice of date reflected the hybrid identity of Chicanos: straddling Mexican and American cultures, Spanish and English, rooted in the old country but with branches fully extended into the new one.

This was the identity Huerta embodied.

Huerta maintained a heavy bilingual speaking schedule to keep up mo­rale. In addition to the typical challenges of organizing, the farmworkers were standing up against bigotry and asserting their American identity—attaching their cause to the Civil Rights Movement.

“Abajo con racism! Down with rac­ism!” Huerta sometimes ended her speeches. “Viva la union! Viva la causa!”

The people in power, the ones who owned the companies that sold the food or wrote laws in the statehouse, had been able to ignore people like the farmworkers—the people who toiled out of sight to keep the system going.

Now, a crowd of people had walked across the state to watch Huerta declare: “We are here and we embody our needs for you.”

(Excerpted from the book ALL WE SAY: The Battle for American Identity: A History in 15 Speeches by Ben Rhodes.)

America’s Roman Holiday: Prime Day and the Price of Convenience

PUBLISHED 6/26/2026 by

Amazon Prime Day has become one of the biggest shopping events in the country, but its success tells a story far bigger than discounts.

In an economy where families are struggling with the cost of groceries, rent, healthcare and childcare, the appeal of lower prices is understandable. Yet the massive scale of Prime Day also raises a harder question: What does it mean when one of America’s defining consumer rituals depends on a labor system that workers, regulators and advocates have repeatedly described as dangerous, underpaid and deeply unequal?

Amazon’s influence extends far beyond its own warehouses. By normalizing ever-faster delivery, constant surveillance and relentless productivity, the company has helped reshape expectations across the retail economy.

As billionaire wealth continues to soar and labor protections face renewed political pressure, Prime Day reveals the growing divide between those who profit from convenience and those whose labor makes it possible.

The World Cup Is Here—But Who Is It For?

PUBLISHED 6/23/2026 by

Soccer is one of the most beloved sports in the world, and the 2026 FIFA World Cup—the largest in the tournament’s history—has drawn millions of fans across the globe. This year, for the first time, the event is being jointly hosted by the United States, Canada and Mexico, with matches and related events taking place across North America.

FIFA stands to earn billions of dollars from the tournament.

But as the organization reaps record revenues, many host communities are bearing significant costs. Soaring ticket prices, displacement, labor concerns and aggressive immigration enforcement have raised questions about who truly benefits from the World Cup. For many working-class residents—and even lifelong soccer fans—the tournament is out of reach.

To better understand those impacts, I spoke with Jennifer Li, co-director of the Center for Community Health Innovation at the O’Neill Institute and director of Dignity 2026, a coalition of labor and human rights organizations working to protect communities most at risk during the World Cup.

Soccer “is very much an immigrant sport, let’s face it,” said Li, “and by extension, a sport for people of color, diverse communities. It is a sport that’s not expensive to play, but very expensive to watch, apparently. So, the question then becomes: Who is this for?”

The FIFA World Cup and the Art of Looking Away

PUBLISHED 6/4/2026 by

When the Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) unveiled the first wave of celebrity promotions for the 2026 FIFA World Cup, the messaging was familiar: unity, celebration and global connection through sport.

Held every four years, the world’s largest international soccer (also known as football) tournament brings together national teams from around the globe to compete for the championship title. The right to host the World Cup is awarded through a competitive FIFA bidding process, with the 2026 tournament being awarded to a joint bid from the United States, Canada and Mexico.

But beneath the glossy advertisement campaigns and official anthems lies an institution repeatedly tied to corruption scandals, labor exploitation and human rights controversies that cannot be danced away by celebrity performances and spectacle marketing.  

Loving the game should not require ignoring the systems surrounding it. Because behind every glittering opening ceremony is an uncomfortable question FIFA would rather audiences not ask: Who is paying the price for the spectacle?

Too often it is people whose labor, rights and well-being are treated as expendable.

Equal Pay Is Getting Pushed Further Away. We’re Pushing Back.

PUBLISHED 3/25/2026 by and

Amid the celebrations of Women’s History Month, it is a bitter irony Equal Pay Day—marking how far into the year women must work to earn what men did in the previous year—has been pushed back to March 26. The end of the month is shadowed by the knowledge that the gender pay gap still exists and is widening.

Black women, women with disabilities, moms and all women of color are paid significantly less than white men in comparable positions. Affordability is already a concern, with prices rising at the gas station and the grocery store. The pay gap is compounding these concerns to create further financial disparities for women of color.