Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Biden calls for change to filibuster rule so Congress can codify Roe v. Wade

Biden calls for filibuster reform

President Biden, speaking at a NATO event in Madrid on Thursday, called for changes to the filibuster in order to protect abortion rights.

Denis Doyle/Getty Images

For the second time this year, President Biden has called for changing Senate rules in order to pass legislation that has deeply divided the country. On Thursday, Biden announced his support for carving out an exception to the filibuster in order to codify Roe v. Wade.

Following the Supreme Court decision undoing Roe, which protected abortion rights at the federal level, trigger laws banned abortion in more than a dozen states with more likely to follow. And with 60 votes required to overcome procedural blockades in the Senate, advocates for women’s right to choose lack a legislative solution barring a change in rules.


In January, after Senate Republicans blocked passage of the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, Biden called for the Senate to change the filibuster rule in order to pass the legislation.

He made the same demand Thursday morning if Congress cannot find another way of passing abortion rights legislation.

And if the filibuster gets in the way, it’s like voting rights,” Biden said at a news conference in Madrid. “We provide an exception for this.”

The filibuster, which is not enshrined in the Constitution but rather a rule established by the Senate, allows an individual lawmaker to prevent a vote on the bill. The only way to break a filibuster is through a procedural motion that requires 60 “yes” votes. In a highly partisan, evenly divided Senate, that will not happen.

While a change in rules requires a bare majority, two Democrats – Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona – have repeatedly declared their opposition to a change in rules.

A poll conducted for CBC News by YouGov in January found that about one-third of Americans want to scrap the filibuster and another third want to keep it. (The rest needed more information.) Within those totals is a partisan divide, with 58 percent of Democrats wanting to eliminate the filibuster and 65 percent of Republicans wanting to keep it.

Read More

Guarding What? The Moral Cost of Militarizing Our Cities

Protestors in Chicago, August 2025

Credit: Angeles Ponpa

Guarding What? The Moral Cost of Militarizing Our Cities

A federal judge recently blocked plans to deploy the National Guard to Chicago. But the battle over militarizing American streets is far from over. On Monday, a federal appeals court lifted a temporary restraining order and ruled that the National Guard can be deployed to Portland, Oregon, amid ongoing protests at the Macadam ICE Facility.

Every time political leaders propose sending troops into cities or float invoking the Insurrection Act, they test a fragile boundary that keeps democracy in check.

Keep ReadingShow less
Joe Manchin on Taxpayer-Funded Primaries: 'They're Locking Us Out!'

Joe Manchin

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Joe Manchin on Taxpayer-Funded Primaries: 'They're Locking Us Out!'

While appearing on CNN host Michael Smerconish’s show, former Democratic U.S. Senator Joe Manchin, now a registered independent, told Smerconish that “we have to have open primaries” in order to get candidates who prioritize representation to run and have a chance to win.

“We have to change the primary,” he added. “They are locking us out.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

President Donald Trump speaks at a White House press briefing on Jan. 30, 2025.

Credit: Jonah Elkowitz/Medill News Service

Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

WASHINGTON — Paul Ingrassia withdrew his nomination to lead the Office of Special Counsel on Tuesday night after facing Republican pushback over past controversial statements.

While Ingrassia joins a growing list of President Donald Trump’s nominees who have withdrawn from consideration, many who have aired controversial beliefs or lack requisite qualifications have still been appointed or are still in the nomination process.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making
low light photography of armchairs in front of desk

A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making

The dysfunction of today’s federal government is not simply the product of political division or individual leaders; it is rooted in the internal rules of Congress itself. The Founders, in one of their few major oversights, granted Congress the authority to make its own procedural rules (Article I, Section 5) without establishing any framework for how it should operate. Over time, this blank check has produced a legislative process built to serve partisan power, not public representation.

The result is a Congress that often rewards obstruction and gridlock over compromise and action. The Founders imagined representatives closely tied to their constituents—one member for every 30,000 to 50,000 citizens. Today, that ratio has ballooned to one for every 765,000 in the House, and in the Senate, each member can represent tens of millions (e.g., California). As the population has grown, representation has become distant and impersonal, while procedural rules have tightened the grip of party leadership. Major issues can no longer reach the floor unless the majority party permits it. The link between citizens and decisions has nearly vanished.

Keep ReadingShow less