From the ongoing fight for abortion rights and access, to elections, to the drive for the Equal Rights Amendment, there are a multitude of battles to keep up with. In this weekly roundup, find the absolute need-to-know news for feminists.

Doctors and abortion rights supporters at a rally outside the Supreme Court on April 24, 2024, as the Court hears oral arguments on Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States to decide if the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act to supersedes an Idaho state law that criminalizes most abortions. (Andrew Harnik / Getty Images)

BY KATHY SPILLAR | Even as we wait for U.S. Supreme Court decisions in two cases set to come down this month that could have massive impacts on abortion access, I fear that a court decision out of Texas and a new law passed in Louisiana foreshadow how the Court might rule. The cases pending before the U.S. Supreme Court involve whether federal law requiring hospitals to provide emergency abortions in cases when a woman’s health—not only her life—is threatened supersedes state abortion bans, and whether the FDA acted properly in its decision to ease regulations making it easier to dispense abortion pills without in-person visits. 

The Texas Supreme Court ruling stems from the Zurawski v. Texas case filed last year by the Center for Reproductive Rights, on behalf of two doctors and 20 Texas women with pregnancy complications denied abortion care as a result of the state’s near-total ban on abortion, including some who almost died.  The plaintiffs argued the ambiguous language in the law had resulted in “pervasive fear and uncertainty among doctors as to when they can provide legal abortions.” Doctors face up to 99 years in prison and at least $100,000 in fines and loss of their medical license for violating the abortion bans. 

On Friday, the court ruled that the state’s abortion bans are clear in providing an exception for abortions in cases where in the physician’s “reasonable medical judgment” an abortion is necessary. Moreover, the court rejected the argument that abortions should be allowed in pregnancies when the fetus would not survive after birth.

The court’s decision is shocking in its cruelty and callousness toward women facing critical medical complications and carrying fetuses with lethal conditions. But I guess none of us are surprised by the outcome in a court stacked with reactionary justices.

(Click here to read more)

Because it's hard to keep up with everything going on in the world right now. Here's what we're reading this week:

• "Expecting worse: Giving birth on a planet in crisis” — Grist
• "Abortion Bans Are Undermining Disabled People’s Decision-Making and Autonomy” — National Women’s Law Center

Tune in for a new episode of Ms. magazine's podcast, On the Issues with Michele Goodwin on

Apple Podcasts + Spotify.

In this episode, we continue our series: Fifteen Minutes of Feminism—The Trump Indictments: Found Guilty! (with Moira Donegan). On May 30, 2024, Donald Trump was found guilty on all 34 counts by a New York jury. In this episode, we unpack the criminal charges that Donald Trump engaged in illegal business, electoral and campaign activities. This week, we’re rejoined by Moira Donegan to discuss why the New York trial was about more than about “hush money” and how the case marks the first time a former president has stood trial for criminal prosecution and been convicted.

We hope you'll listen, subscribe, rate and review today!

READ THE REST | GET THE MAGAZINE | SUPPORT MS.

Enjoy this newsletter? Forward to a friend!
Was this email forwarded to you by a friend? Subscribe.

Ms. Magazine
1600 Wilson Boulevard
Suite 801
Arlington, VA 22209
United States

If you believe you received this message in error or wish to no longer receive email from us, please 

unsubscribe.