State Suicide: A Weapon for Progressive Politics

It’s 2025, and healthcare for women and transgender Americans is under threat, thanks to our far-right government. Democrats are far from helpless, though: given how narrow the Republican victory was, broad support for legal abortion, and President Trump’s middling approval ratings, it is likely that the Democrats will regain Congressional control in the next few years.

After regaining Congress, the Democrats must undo the damage that Republicans have dealt to rights for women, the LGBTQ+ community, and all other marginalized communities. An ideology from Reconstruction days might be particularly useful: Representative Charles Sumner’s theory of “state suicide”, or felo de se.

As a senior Radical Republican, Sumner was staunchly anti-slavery and a supporter of Black equality. After the Civil War, he presciently realized that to prevent white Southerners from regaining power and exploiting the newly freed Black populace, the federal government must vigorously enforce Reconstruction. According to the state suicide theory, the South renounced its rights as states by seceding. It would thus be treated as territories subject to Congressional authority until they were reconstituted as truly democratic. Sumner further believed that, as part of his state suicide plan, Congress should provide universal male suffrage for formerly enslaved people while imposing requirements such as a literacy test on white men.

Sumner’s plan was never enacted, but that does not mean his idea lacks merit: contextually, Americans were suffering from our bloodiest and most divisive war, so a vigorous Reconstruction, while morally correct, was out of step with what most White Americans desired. However, national outrage at the overruling of Roe v. Wade saw the Democrats perform unusually well amidst rising inflation, despite the general rule that incumbent parties suffer during midterm elections. Americans, therefore, faced with unpopular Republican measures on issues such as abortion, may be more supportive of radical steps to combat conservative intransigence in 2026 than they were in 1866.

With this in mind, it is clear that radical work is needed. As of November 2024, twenty-one states ban abortion through the 18th week. As of June 2024, twenty states have bans on trans-affirming healthcare for minors in effect, and twenty-five in total have passed. More recently, Trump issued an executive order banning hormone replacement therapy for those under nineteen, a stunning reversal of rights for both women and transgender Americans.

Once Democrats regain power, they should declare that any state violating the equal protection clause by denying healthcare to women or transgender individuals is committing state suicide and will be placed under federal oversight until recognized as a democratic union. Republican-led states, like Florida, have systematically violated the civil liberties of women and transgender individuals, disregarding the Constitution and its protections. Although the Supreme Court may push back against such measures, it is important to recognize the dynamic nature of U.S. politics: Justices Alito and Thomas are both in their seventies, making it highly possible for a Democratic President and Congress to appoint more ideologically sympathetic justices by 2040.

Furthermore, there is an argument that these reversals are unconstitutional: the 14th Amendment declares that no state shall “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Trans healthcare bans violate the equal protection clause because trans-affirming healthcare is a net positive for those who require it. So, there is no reason to ban it besides discriminating against a vulnerable population. Access to trans-affirming healthcare, such as puberty blockers and hormones, decreases odds of “moderate to severe depression” among transgender youth by 60 percent and reduces odds of suicide or self-harm among that same population by 73 percent. Only 8 percent of all individuals who receive such healthcare “detransition”, and of that 8 percent, most do so only temporarily and due to transphobic peer pressure. Trans healthcare bans are therefore discriminatory because they infringe upon privacy rights and cause undue material harm to a subset of people.

Similarly, legal abortion unilaterally improves women’s health. An abortion ban would lead to pregnancy-related deaths in the United States increasing by 21 percent, and by 33 percent among Black women due to systemic racism. Ninety-five percent of women who have received an abortion view it as the right decision five years afterward, and 84 percent had either positive or neutral feelings about the procedure. The state has no right to force women to be incubators against their health or will for a fetus, which is no more a human baby than an acorn is a sapling. Abortion bans are discriminatory, therefore, under the same logic as trans healthcare bans.

The next Democratic Congress should do everything in its power to counter Republican conservatism to uphold Constitutional values and protect the lives of Americans. Liberals, progressives, and leftists opposed to Trump’s regime must unseat all Democrats who do not support progressive positions on abortion and transgender healthcare. They must donate, if possible, to local health centers that serve the transgender community or to local abortion funds and the Transgender Law Center. Left-leaning individuals should run for local office to build a cadre of politicians and officials who support rights for all gender minorities.