Author: Kennedi Munson

Supreme Court Delivers Blow to Transgender Student Athletes

Posted on by Kennedi Munson

On June 30th, in a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court upheld laws from West Virginia and Idaho that prohibit transgender athletes from competing on girls’ and women’s sports teams. Known as Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J., both of these cases were closely watched for their implications for Title IX and transgender rights.

Little v. Hecox stems from Idaho’s 2020 Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, H.B. 500. The act prohibits transgender women and girls from participating in women’s and girls’ interscholastic sports teams from primary school through college. The plaintiff, Lindsay Hecox, challenged the law after being barred from trying out for her university’s women’s track and cross country team due to H.B. 500. 

Hecox argued that the act violated Title IX and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. She filed a suit against Idaho’s Governor Brad Little to halt H.B. 500’s enforcement. 

In response to the ruling, HRC President Kelley Robinson shared in a statement, “When politicians convince the public that any girl could be ‘the wrong kind of girl,’ they invite harassment, intimidation, invasive questioning, or even an inspection of their body by a total stranger.”

A similar Title IX violation was at the center of West Virginia v. B.P.J. In 2021, West Virginia enacted the “Save Women’s Sports Act,” H.B. 3293. This bill requires student-athletes to participate in athletic or sporting events based on the athlete’s biological sex.

The plaintiff, identified in court filings as B.P.J., is a transgender girl who has competed on girls’ athletic teams since elementary school. After H.B. 3293 took effect, she was prohibited from continuing.

In this case, B.P.J. sued the West Virginia State Board of Education and other state and county education officials, as well as the West Virginia Secondary School Activities Commission. This was on the grounds that excluding her from girls’ sports violates the Equal Protection Clause and Title IX.

As Sruti Swaminathan, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU representing Hecox, explained: “It’s not just about trophies and competitions. It’s even just the mere presence of trans girls on girls teams that’s bothering these states and these advocates on the other side.”

Cases like these highlight preexisting barriers transgender athletes have faced when it comes to participating in sports, as seen with Executive Order 14201, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports.”  

In her dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson shared, “The institution has imposed its gender-based expectations upon her. And either way, the institution may have violated Title IX.”

The rulings from the Supreme Court exclude transgender students’ participation in school athletics nationwide. With June 30th marking the final day of Pride month, decisions like this highlight continued roll backs on protections for marginalized communities, and emphasize the need to fight for collective liberation.

Supreme Court Protects Mail-In Voting Access in Mississippi

Posted on by Kennedi Munson

On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to uphold a Mississippi law allowing absentee ballots that are postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they are received within five business days after the election.

The case challenged Mississippi House Bill 1521, which permits election officials to count timely mailed ballots that arrive after Election Day. Mississippi is one of 14 states with a similar policy for mail-in ballots. 

This grace period was especially important during the COVID-19 pandemic and continues to benefit military service members, military family, and US citizens living overseas, ensuring their ballots are received and counted. 

In January of 2024, the RNC, the Mississippi Republican Party, and other plaintiffs, filed a federal lawsuit challenging the law in federal court. The plaintiffs argued that federal elections should have a uniform national Election Day, with all ballots received by that date. 

The case highlights a rise in disenfranchisement in the US, where states are failing to address voters’ needs. Taking into account unreliable mail services, working families unable to go to the polls, and people living overseas, voter protection is essential to ensure a healthy democracy. 

Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, criticized an earlier lower court ruling, stating that it “upends this longstanding federalist arrangement, threatening to silence eligible voters whose ballots arrive late through no fault of their own.”

By upholding Mississippi’s law, the Supreme Court preserved the state’s ability to count ballots that are mailed by Election Day but received shortly afterward. The ruling also allows other states with similar ballot receipt deadlines to continue administering their elections under existing law.

Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett emphasized that while election fraud is a serious concern, changes to national election procedures should come through Congress rather than the courts. “If varied deadlines for ballot receipt similarly call for a national solution,” she wrote, “the American people must choose it through their elected representatives.”

The decision preserves voting access for thousands of Americans who rely on absentee voting each election cycle. Voters with disabilities, rural communities, working families, and countless citizens overseas can continue to participate in a democratic process. This ruling serves as a reminder of the power of both your voice and vote in every election.

Public Support for Same-Sex Marriage Falls From Recent Highs

Posted on by Kennedi Munson

On June 26th, 2015, in a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court issued Obergefell v. Hodges, a landmark decision that legalized same-sex marriage in the United States. For over a decade, the ruling has remained in effect under the Fourteenth Amendment, Equal Protection Clause, and Due Process Clauses. 

When Obergefell was decided, 60% of U.S. adults believed “same-sex marriages should be valid,” and 63% said that “gay or lesbian relations are morally acceptable.” Support has steadily increased amongst U.S. adults since 1996, reaching an all-time peak in 2022. At that point, 71% of U.S adults supported same-sex marriage, and 71% viewed same-sex relationships as morally acceptable. 

Many believe the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade contributed to the surge in support. The ruling raised concerns that other rights-based decisions, including Obergefell, could face future challenges. If Roe v Wade could be threatened and overturned by the Supreme Court, then who was next? 

Those fears helped mobilize support for LGBTQIA+rights and contribute to the passage of The Respect for Marriage Act in 2022. This bill requires federal, state, and territorial governments to recognize the validity of same-sex and interracial marriages. 

However, recent polling suggests public support may be slipping. Support for same-sex marriage declined from 71% in 2023 to 69% in 2024. By May 2026, that number had fallen to 65%.     

The decline has coincided with increasing political polarization. Since returning to office in 2025, President Trump has signed several executive orders affecting LGBTQIA+ Americans. These include Executive Order 14168 which federally recognizes two sexes, male and female; Executive Order 14187, banning gender-affirming care for individuals under 19; and Executive Order 14151 which ended many Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs.  

Support for same-sex marriage has fallen most sharply among Republicans, dropping from 55% in 2022 to 37% today. Nevertheless, this decline extends beyond one political party. Democratic support has decreased from 85% to 81%, while support among Independents has fallen from 72% to 64%. 

These trends highlight a larger national issue at hand: the collective rampant intolerance towards marginalized communities. A singular political party or administration is not to blame for the general issue Americans have with supporting the LGBTQIA+ community. 

At the same time, polling data does not always reflect the lived experiences of LGBTQ+ people. In 2022, the same year support for same-sex marriage peaked, it marked one of the deadliest years for transgender people. More specifically, 84% of victims of violence against transgender and gender non-conforming people were people of color. A paradox between poll statistics and the lived experiences of the LGBTQIA+ community is a reminder that structural and systemic amendments also need to be made for holistic support. 

With June signifying Pride month, the decline in support for the LGBTQIA+ community, coupled with the cases of fatal violence that community members face, highlights why this month is so necessary to spotlight. This Pride, and throughout the year, it is important that everyone makes a concerted effort to lean into love, community, and mutual aid, as those are the essential tools that will uplift us through these times.  

More Than Half of States Now Cover Doula Care Under Medicaid

Posted on by Kennedi Munson

As of April 2026, over half of U.S. states, along with Washington, D.C., provide Medicaid coverage for doula care. 27 states and D.C. currently offer coverage, while seven additional states (Arkansas, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Tennessee, and Vermont) are in the process of implementing programs. 

Under these policies, Medicaid enrollees can receive coverage for doula services, while certified doulas are reimbursed for prenatal and postpartum visits, as well as labor and delivery attendance. 

The expansion comes as the United States continues to face a maternal health crisis. The U.S. has the highest maternal mortality rate among comparable high-income countries, with 18.4 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. The rate is significantly higher for Black women, who experience 50.3 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. 

In response to these disparities, many Black and Indigenous communities have long relied on doula care as a source of support throughout pregnancy, childbirth, and the postpartum period. However, doula services have historically not been covered by Medicaid or private insurance, limiting access for many low-income families.

Doulas are trained, non-clinical professionals who provide physical, emotional, and educational support during pregnancy, birth, and postpartum recovery. The expansion of state doula coverage through Medicaid marks a valuable enhancement of the perinatal health workforce that promotes evidence-based education, connections to resources, and support during delivery. 

Oregon became the first state to explore Medicaid coverage for doulas, when it enacted H.B. 3311 inJune 2011. Minnesota followed in 2013, with the passage of  SF 699.  Since then, momentum has steadily grown across the country.

Implementation varies by state. In Virginia, for example, doulas must first become certified through the Virginia Certification Board, register as network providers, enroll in Medicaid, and complete 60 hours of training before providing services. 

Despite growing support for Medicaid-funded doula care, challenges remain. Some doulas have called for “more awareness and outreach, and continuing to give evidence-based information on how doulas are actually beneficial throughout the pregnancy, birth, and postpartum periods.”

Awareness remains a significant barrier. In 2013, only 6% of women reported using doula services. While utilization has increased since then, many pregnant patients are still unaware that they may be eligible for Medicaid-covered doula care. Other challenges doulas have expressed with Medicaid coverage for their care include: a shortage of doulas in some regions, limited Medicaid reimbursements, and independent doulas wanting to be more involved in discussions with state Medicaid staff. 

As more states expand Medicaid coverage for doula care, addressing these challenges will be critical to ensuring that patients can fully benefit from these services. Greater awareness, stronger support for the doula workforce, and more equitable implementation could help reduce maternal mortality rates and improve reproductive health outcomes, particularly for historically marginalized communities.

>