From illegally dismantling federal agencies and resisting court orders to politicizing the Justice Department and pardoning the January 6 insurrectionists, the new Trump administration’s actions have flown in the face of the rule of law. Meanwhile, the GOP majority in Congress is pushing the SAVE Act, which would require Americans to produce a passport or birth certificate to register (or re-register) to vote. If enacted, the legislation could disenfranchise millions of Americans, especially people of color and married women who have changed their names. But there is also a growing public appetite to fight back — here are three things that individuals can do now to stand up for democracy.

The path to the 19th Amendment, which granted women the right to vote, spanned more than a century and was driven by the tireless efforts of generations of activists. But securing the franchise was only part of the battle. It took decades more to ensure that all women — particularly women of color, who faced racially discriminatory barriers — could truly exercise that right. In honor of Women’s History Month, our new explainer dives into the long, winding road to women’s suffrage and highlights the key figures who made it possible.

The losing candidate in last fall’s election to fill a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court is challenging more than 60,000 votes over a technicality. Last week, the Brennan Center and co-counsel filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of overseas voters whose ballots are at risk of being thrown out. The stakes are high: If the courts side with this effort, it could not only disenfranchise American voters but also fuel baseless attacks on the democratic process in other states.

Three state attorneys general have revived a federal lawsuit seeking to ban medication abortion, and once again, the case will be heard by a judge in Amarillo, Texas, who openly opposes abortion. This isn’t by chance — it’s part of a disturbing trend known as “judge shopping,” in which plaintiffs strategically choose a judge likely to rule in their favor. Our new explainer dives into how this practice works, its impact on the fairness and credibility of the courts, and what can be done to end it.

The Department of Homeland Security’s lead intelligence unit has spent the past two years trying to reform its controversial practices, including its targeted surveillance of Americans. While recent changes represent a small step forward, they don’t tackle the deeper risks of abuse — particularly when it comes to politically sensitive issues like social media monitoring and immigration enforcement. A former DHS intelligence attorney warns that unless Congress intervenes, the department’s troubling legacy of overreach is likely to continue.