Skip to content
Project 2025
Donate to support
diverse voices
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories
East Wing's Demolition Highlights U.S. Construction Waste Problem

East Wing's Demolition Highlights U.S. Construction Waste Problem

We Are Still Afraid to Name Them Because Nothing Happens When We Do

We Are Still Afraid to Name Them Because Nothing Happens When We Do

Trump & Hegseth gave Mark Kelly a huge 2028 gift

Trump & Hegseth gave Mark Kelly a huge 2028 gift

“Pulling Donald Trump’s Teeth”

“Pulling Donald Trump’s Teeth”

I Watched the State of the Union Address: Everyone is “Winning” Except Child Care

I Watched the State of the Union Address: Everyone is “Winning” Except Child Care

What is a trigger law?

Anti-abortion protest at the Supreme Court

Proponents and opponents of abortion rights gather outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

Nicholas Kamm/AFP via Getty Images
David Meyers
By David MeyersMay 04, 2022
David Meyers

David Meyers is the Executive Editor of The Fulcrum. Before launching The Fulcrum, David spent more than two decades at CQ Roll Call, a leading publisher of political news and information. During his time there, David served as managing editor of Roll Call (“the newspaper of Capitol Hill”) and as managing editor of member information and research, which included co-editing the definitive biographical directory of Congress, “Politics in America.” David went on to lead all of CQ Roll Call’s congressional research teams as vice president of research and content development before shifting to a revenue and strategy role as vice president of business operations for Roll Call, working with the advertising and editorial teams to develop new revenue models and expand the company’s events business. David lives in Fairfax, Va., with his wife, two daughters and rottweiler. A graduate of Tufts University, David is a past president of the Tufts University Alumni Association. He is also a past president of the Washington Press Club Foundation, which works to celebrate and advance the role of women and minorities in the media. David currently serves on the board of directors for Temple B’nai Shalom in Fairfax Station.

See More Writings by author

If the Supreme Court’s draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade becomes an official court decision, states will be free to legislate abortion issues as they see fit. Abortions will immediately become illegal in 13 states that have passed “trigger laws” tied to a court decision.

What does that mean?

A trigger law is designed to take effect when certain conditions are met. The legislative maneuver is in the news this week because more than a dozen states, mostly in the South and the Plains, have laws that would ban or restrict abortions as soon as the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision is overturned.

Trigger laws are now solely the province of legislatures that oppose abortion. For example, a handful of states will automatically shut down their Medicaid expansion if certain conditions change at the federal level.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, the following states have trigger laws that would restrict, if not ban, abortions:

  • Arkansas
  • Idaho
  • Kentucky
  • Louisiana
  • Mississippi
  • Missouri
  • North Dakota
  • Oklahoma
  • South Dakota
  • Tennessee
  • Texas
  • Utah
  • Wyoming

Nine states, some overlapping with the above list, already had abortion ban laws on the books prior to Roe, and those laws would once again be in effect if the the court acts as expected:

  • Alabama
  • Arizona
  • Arkansas
  • Michigan
  • Mississippi
  • Oklahoma
  • Texas
  • West Virginia
  • Wisconsin

If these laws go into effect, millions of people would be barred from having an abortion unless Congress passes legislation making abortion legal nationwide. However, any such bill would need 60 votes to overcome a Senate filibuster (which is not going to happen). The alternative would be to change or eliminate the filibuster rule so legislation can be passed by a simple majority vote. But centrist Democrats Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema remain opposed to changing the filibuster rules.


Latest news

Crowd waving flags
Governance & Legislation

The Government We Value Is Fading

Speak Now or Forever War
Ethics & Leadership

Speak Now or Forever War

President Franklin D. Roosevelt addressing congress, December 8, 1941.
Ethics & Leadership

Four Freedoms: What We Are Fighting For

A Breakdown of Anti-Immigration Bills Moving Through the Arizona Legislature in 2026
Governance & Legislation

A Breakdown of Anti-Immigration Bills Moving Through the Arizona Legislature in 2026

Read More

Latino Voter Landscape Shifts as Economic Pressures Reshape Support for Both Parties

Your Vote Counts postid

Latino Voter Landscape Shifts as Economic Pressures Reshape Support for Both Parties

New polling and expert analysis reveal a shifting and increasingly complex political landscape among Hispanic and Latino voters in the United States. While recent surveys show that economic pressures continue to dominate voter concerns, they also highlight a broader fragmentation of political identity that is reshaping long‑standing assumptions about Latino electoral behavior. A Pew Research Center poll indicates that President Donald Trump has lost support among Hispanic voters, with 70% disapproving of his performance, even though 42% of Latinos voted for him in 2024, a ten‑point increase from 2020. Among those who supported him, approval remains relatively high at 81%, though this marks a decline from earlier polling.

At the same time, Democrats are confronting their own challenges. Data comparing the 2024 American Electorate Voter Poll with the 2020 American Election Eve Poll show that Democratic margins dropped by 23 points among Latino men, raising concerns among party strategists about weakening support heading into the 2026 midterms. Analysts argue that despite these declines, sustained investment in Latino voter engagement remains essential, particularly as turnout efforts have historically influenced electoral outcomes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Compassion and Common Sense Must Coexist in Immigration Policy
Changing Conversations Around Immigration
Leif Christoph Gottwald on Unsplash

Compassion and Common Sense Must Coexist in Immigration Policy

I am writing this not as a Democrat or a Republican, but as an American who believes that compassion and common sense must coexist. I understand why many people feel sympathy for those who come to the United States seeking safety or opportunity. That compassion is part of who we are as a nation. But compassion alone cannot guide national policy, especially when the consequences affect every citizen, every community, and every generation that follows.

For more than two centuries, people from around the world have entered this country through a legal process—sometimes long, sometimes difficult, but always rooted in the idea that a nation has the right and responsibility to know who is entering its borders. That principle is not new, and it is not partisan. It is simply how a functioning country protects its people and maintains order.

Keep ReadingShow less
SCOTUS Tariffs Case: Representative Government vs Authoritarianism.
scotus rulings voting rights, disclosure
scotus rulings voting rights, disclosure

SCOTUS Tariffs Case: Representative Government vs Authoritarianism.

The Supreme Court Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (Tariffs) and consolidated related cases relate to the following issues:

(1) Whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) authorizes the tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump; and

Keep ReadingShow less
Immigration Was the Loudest Silence in Trump’s State of the Union

U.S. President Donald Trump delivers the State of the Union address during a joint session of Congress in the House Chamber at the Capitol on February 24, 2026 in Washington, DC.

LatinoNewsNetwork.com

Immigration Was the Loudest Silence in Trump’s State of the Union

President Donald Trump spoke for 108 minutes during the 2026 State of the Union — the longest address in American history. He covered the economy, foreign policy, manufacturing, and national pride. But for all the words, one of the most consequential issues facing the country was reduced to a single statistic and then set aside.

Immigration — one of the administration’s signature issues — was nearly invisible in the address. A Medill News Service analysis shows the president devoted less than 10% of his remarks to the topic, amounting to roughly ten minutes in total.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026