Grateful for the 19th Amendment Turning 105

The 19th Amendment was certified 105 years ago this week.

Illustration of the 19th Amendment of the Constitution looking at a birthday cake with "105" candles on it.

It says:

Illustration of the U.S. Constitution with the text of the 19th Amendment ("The right of Citizens of the U.S. to vote shall now be abridged or denied by the US or by any state on account of sex."

Congress approved the Amendment on June 4, 1919, but then it had to be ratified by 36 of the 48 states.

Illustration of Congress building with arms and legs holding up a banner that says "19th Amendment Approved! Onto the States!"

Tennessee was the 36th state to ratify, on August 18, 1920. A few days later,¹ it was certified and made official.

Illustration of the contiguous U.S., where all but the south eastern states are colored in pink with numbers. This shows that the states that ratified the 19th amendment were everyone but the South (and Vermont).

A couple more states ratified in the next few years.

Illustration of the U.S., in an outline, highlighting three small states to show how in the early 1920s they also ratified the Amendment.

And, even though it already applied to them, it took nine more states 20+ years to ratify the amendment.

Illustration of the U.S., highlighting all the South Eastern states and pointing out the year they ratified the Amendment. E.g., Louisiana was 1970.

The 19th Amendment’s addition to our Constitution didn’t mean, in reality, that every woman in the U.S. got to vote from that moment on. Jim Crow laws, the Chinese Exclusion Act, and policies towards Native Americans prevented many women from voting for many years.

Illustration of the 19th Amendment with arms and legs saying, "Women can vote!" and standing off against a reedy pole with a straw hat called "poll tax," who is saying "Not if they don't pay up!"

This is one of the challenges with laws. They can seem super straightforward on their face (“You can’t prevent women from voting!”), but some other law or legal interpretation (“It’s fiiiiine to charge poll taxes, even though that effectively prevents any woman who can’t pay from voting.”) can warp the result.

Usually this is intentional, though never the claimed reason. (They have to be able to hide behind some other reason.) Poll taxes aren’t legal anymore, but this kind of thing, in different forms, is still very much a challenge today.

I’m grateful for all the people who fought for the 19th Amendment, the legislators who voted for it, and the advocates who continue to work to make voting as accessible as possible!

Voting selfies + 1 voting grandma

I’m also grateful for all the times I’ve voted, for being able to help my grandma vote from home, and for all the times you’ve voted, too.

Thanks for being here and voting!

(Also, are people in other states as excited about the sticker you get after voting, or is that just us in Minnesota? (Or is it not even a Minnesota thing and it’s just me?))

Title IX and Thinking of Yourself as An Athlete

The end of June is a funny time with respect to momentous legal moments. Today is the ten-year anniversary of the Obergefell Supreme Court decision that established same-sex marriage as a fundamental right under the Constitution.

Two days ago was the 3-year anniversary of the Dobbs decision that took away a fundamental right to reproductive choice and healthcare that American women held for 50 years. That decision overturned 50 years of precedent and emphasized to all that Supreme Court interpretation, in the most contentious cases, boils down to the views of a majority of whoever has been placed on the Court.

And three days ago was the 53rd anniversary of my favorite law, which forced the doors open for women in education and sports.

Illustration of Title IX, women in sports.

That law still IS Title IX. This is an excerpt from a longer comic explaining the law.

As Title IX approached its 50th birthday, I started interviewing women I knew about their interaction with sports. I was fascinated by the fact that the impact of Title IX varied based on when you were born. For me, it was so impactful that I had no concept of girls’ sports being anything other than full of opportunity. For one of my tennis buddies, it didn’t come soon enough—she had to sue to be allowed to play on the boys high school team.

In honor of the anniversary three days ago, I want to share one of these interviews that did make its way into a comic form.

Illustration is a comic about a woman who grew up thinking she couldn't be an athlete, until as an adult she gave it a try..

Comic is of a woman who grew up thinking she wasn't fit enough to be an athlete because it was before Title IX. She ends up doing sports as an adult.

Cheers to Lisa the athlete! I love this story because it points out how not everyone who was missed by Title IX was going to just play sports anyway, Billie Jean King style. That’s exactly why this law has been so impactful—it opened the doors for every girl to be able to see herself as an athlete, from a young age.

Thank you for reading!

Birthright Citizenship in the U.S.

What’s going on with birthright citizenship in the U.S.? In May 2025, there was oral argument at the Supreme Court on this topic. What was it really about? This explainer comic illustrates this specific point in the litigation.

Text says, "What's happening with birthright citizenship?" Illustration shows a baby holding a U.S. flag, in a bassinet. Sign on bassinet says "Welcome baby!"

Text says, "birthright citizenship has long been a no-brainer aside from some fringe theories. Just read the start of the Fourteenth Amendment." Illustration shows a drawing of a yellow scroll with text of 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Text says, "The fringe theories made it to the White House this year, and turned into an Executive Order." Illustration shows a White House with arms and legs holding the birthright citizenship executive order from January 2025.

Text says, "This was quickly put on hold (aka 'nationwide preliminary injunctions') by federal district courts in Seattle, Maryland, and Massachusetts. Illustration shows stick figure judges holding up papers that say "Not ok. Pause!"

Text says, "But the Government didn't stop there, asking the Supreme Court to decide that nationwide injunctions (holds) are wrong and should not apply to anyone other than the plaintiffs in the cases put on hold."

Illustrations how's White House holding a sign saying "We're not asking about the Constitution itself.." and text explains it's a procedural appeal.

Text explains that the case has yet to be decided, but unclear how Court will rule.