It would be difficult to imagine a 2015 session that could have rivaled the 2013 special summer session in terms of restrictions. But dangerous bills did get traction this year—and some made their way into law.
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence’s reputation took a drubbing in the aftermath of the “religious freedom restoration act.” But many progressives feel his would-be adversary, John Gregg, isn’t progressive enough to satisfy voters.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled states can refuse to print license plates displaying the Confederate flag. But the decision is not the win it looks like for reproductive rights advocates.
The decision to uphold the ambulatory surgical center provisions of HB 2 seems designed to bait the Roberts Court to take on another major abortion case.
Some progressives argue that Sanders’ laser-like focus on economic inequality is too narrow—not just because he doesn’t talk about other issues, but because the way he talks about his favorite issue only tells part of the story.
The Court’s decision in Elonis v. Facebook offered no clarity for those who face violent online harassment.
The Roberts Court will consider stepping into the fight over Mississippi’s admitting privileges requirement for abortion providers in a case that could make it harder for pro-choice advocates to combat restrictions based in junk science.
In what advocates are calling an historic ruling, a judge in Fresno County, California, ruled last week that a lawsuit against the Clovis Unified School District’s abstinence-focused sex education program was justified because it was out of compliance with the state’s law.
Twelve states have enacted such policies, which require doctors to obtain admitting privileges at a local hospital, and they are in effect in five states. But the seminal questions are: Does this requirement benefit women? And what are the costs to women and providers?
With his announcement that he would sign a 20-week abortion ban should one reach his desk, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker joins a slate of fervently anti-choice Republican presidential candidates who support a flatly unconstitutional law.