Listen to this story.Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.
Your browser does not support the <audio> element.
AS A PROTEST slogan, “Stop Political Interference” does not trip lightly off the tongue. But to abortion-rights activists brandishing signs with the phrase on the steps of Florida’s Supreme Court on February 7th, it cut to the heart of their precarious campaign. Inside the court that morning, judges were debating whether to allow Florida voters to decide a ballot question in November that would codify a right to abortion in the state constitution. Campaigners collected more than a million signatures to qualify the initiative, but it remains uncertain whether voters will be permitted to have a say.
Florida is one of 13 states considering ballot measures related to abortion this year. National attention is likely to turn to those in Arizona and Nevada, where Democrats hope the initiatives will bolster turnout in the swing states. A successful referendum in Florida would have a greater impact on abortion access. Currently, the procedure is legal in the state up to 15 weeks of pregnancy—the most liberal regime in the Deep South. Florida has become a destination for women living in more restrictive nearby states and is now third in the country for number of abortions, according to the Society of Family Planning, a non-profit group.
Florida’s abortion law is likely to change this year, one way or another. Last April, Governor Ron DeSantis signed a law banning abortion after six weeks, stopping access to the procedure before many women know they are pregnant. The law is tied up in the courts, but is expected to take effect at some point this year. A quite different regime would take hold if the proposed ballot initiative were to pass. It would establish a state right to abortion until viability—generally around 23 weeks—and after that time if the life and health of the mother were at stake.
Since June 2022, when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade and ended a federal constitutional right to abortion, seven states have held ballot initiatives on the issue. Each time, abortion rights have won out, including in deep-red Kansas and ruddy Ohio. Florida, however, has one of the most challenging environments for ballot initiatives, says Jonathan Marshfield of the University of Florida’s law school. He compares the process to a freshwater fish in the ocean: it is hard to survive, but “it could be worse and totally out of the water,” since Florida at least allows ballot initiatives, unlike some states.
Collecting the signatures to qualify required 10,000 volunteers as well as paid collectors. Now the ballot language must be approved by the state Supreme Court. It has leeway to decide whether the wording will be sufficiently comprehensible to a typical voter.
Florida’s high court judges are not sympathetic to abortion rights. Mr DeSantis appointed five of the seven who heard the arguments, in no small part because they held dependably pro-life views. One of the other two judges introduced a restrictive abortion law while serving previously in the US House of Representatives.
Florida’s attorney-general, Ashley Moody, argued against the proposed amendment, saying that its language “vastly understates [its] potentially sweeping scope”. The judges seemed sceptical that voters would be misled, with the state’s chief justice, Carlos Muñiz, calling the language, “self-evidently broad”. He added, “The people of Florida aren’t stupid. They can figure this out.” Abortion-rights campaigners are playing it cool, assuring nervous supporters that the language was designed to withstand expected legal challenges. Court watchers are more cautious and give the referendum even odds of appearing on the ballot in November.
If it does go forward, it will require heavy support to prevail. Florida ballot initiatives must earn a 60% supermajority to succeed. Aaron DiPietro of the Florida Family Planning Council, which is campaigning against the amendment, cites this high threshold as the chief difference with earlier anti-abortion amendment campaigns in other states. “No red or purple-leaning state in any of these abortion amendments has received over 60% support,” he points out. Abortion-rights campaigners did come close, however, attracting 59% support in Kansas and just under 57% in Ohio and Michigan.
Florida’s voters have occasionally met the supermajority requirement, including in a ballot initiative that returned voting rights to felons. However, that result was subsequently undermined by a determinedly conservative state government. Former felons now have to pay fees before they can vote, disqualifying nearly 80% of them. Similarly, after medical marijuana was made legal at the ballot box, the state house banned smoking it. Even if the latest initiative is adopted, the struggle over access to abortion in Florida is all but certain to continue. ■
Stay on top of American politics with The US in brief, our daily newsletter with fast analysis of the most important electoral stories, and Checks and Balance, a weekly note from our Lexington columnist that examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters.
Andersen Ross Photography Inc | Digitalvision | Getty Images
Wall Street is warning that the U.S. Department of Education’s crack down on student loan repayments may take billions of dollars out of consumers’ pockets and hit low income Americans particularly hard.
The department has restarted collections on defaulted student loans under President Donald Trump this month. For first time in around five years, borrowers who haven’t kept up with their bills could see their wages taken or face other punishments.
Using a range of interest rates and lengths of repayment plans, JPMorgan estimated that disposable personal income could be collectively cut by between $3.1 billion and $8.5 billion every month due to collections, according to Murat Tasci, senior U.S. economist at the bank and a Cleveland Federal Reserve alum.
If that all surfaced in one quarter, collections on defaulted and seriously delinquent loans alone would slash between 0.7% and 1.8% from disposable personal income year-over-year, he said.
This policy change may strain consumers who are already stressed out by Trump’s tariff plan and high prices from years of runaway inflation. These factors can help explain why closely followed consumer sentiment data compiled by the University of Michigan has been hitting some of its lowest levels in its seven-decade history in the past two months.
“You have a number of these pressure points rising,” said Jeffrey Roach, chief economist at LPL Financial. “Perhaps in aggregate, it’s enough to quash some of these spending numbers.”
Bank of America said this push to collect could particularly weigh on groups that are on more precarious financial footing. “We believe resumption of student loan payments will have knock-on effects on broader consumer finances, most especially for the subprime consumer segment,” Bank of America analyst Mihir Bhatia wrote to clients.
Economic impact
Student loans account for just 9% of all outstanding consumer debt, according to Bank of America. But when excluding mortgages, that share shoots up to 30%.
Total outstanding student loan debt sat at $1.6 trillion at the end of March, an increase of half a trillion dollars in the last decade.
The New York Fed estimates that nearly one of every four borrowers required to make payments are currently behind. When the federal government began reporting loans as delinquent in the first quarter of this year, the share of debt holders in this boat jumped up to 8% from around 0.5% in the prior three-month period.
To be sure, delinquency is not the same thing as default. Delinquency refers to any loan with a past-due payment, while defaulting is more specific and tied to not making a delayed payment with a period of time set by the provider. The latter is considered more serious and carries consequences such as wage garnishment. If seriously delinquent borrowers also defaulted, JPMorgan projected that almost 25% of all student loans would be in the latter category.
JPMorgan’s Tasci pointed out that not all borrowers have wages or Social Security earnings to take, which can mitigate the firm’s total estimates. Some borrowers may resume payments with collections beginning, though Tasci noted that would likely also eat into discretionary spending.
Trump’s promise to reduce taxes on overtime and tips, if successful, could also help erase some effects of wage garnishment on poorer Americans.
Still, the expected hit to discretionary income is worrisome as Wall Street wonders if the economy can skirt a recession. Much hope has been placed on the ability of consumers to keep spending even if higher tariffs push product prices higher or if the labor market weakens.
LPL’s Roach sees this as less of an issue. He said the postpandemic economy has largely been propped up by high-income earners, who have done the bulk of the spending. This means the tide-change for student loan holders may not hurt the macroeconomic picture too much, he said.
“It’s hard to say if there’s a consensus view on this yet,” Roach said. “But I would say the student loan story is not as important as perhaps some of the other stories, just because those who hold student loans are not necessarily the drivers of the overall economy.”
A woman walks in an aisle of a Walmart supermarket in Houston, Texas, on May 15, 2025.
Ronaldo Schemidt | Afp | Getty Images
U.S. consumers are becoming increasingly worried that tariffs will lead to higher inflation, according to a University of Michigan survey released Friday.
The index of consumer sentiment dropped to 50.8, down from 52.2 in April, in the preliminary reading for May. That is the second-lowest reading on record, behind June 2022.
The outlook for price changes also moved in the wrong direction. Year-ahead inflation expectations rose to 7.3% from 6.5% last month, while long-term inflation expectations ticked up to 4.6% from 4.4%.
However, the majority of the survey was completed before the U.S. and China announced a 90-day pause on most tariffs between the two countries. The trade situation appears to be a key factor weighing on consumer sentiment.
“Tariffs were spontaneously mentioned by nearly three-quarters of consumers, up from almost 60% in April; uncertainty over trade policy continues to dominate consumers’ thinking about the economy,” Surveys of Consumers director Joanne Hsu said in the release.
Inflation expectations are closely watched by investors and policymakers. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has said the central bank wants to make sure long-term inflation expectations do not rise because of tariffs before resuming rate cuts.
A final consumer sentiment index for the month is slated to be released on May 30, and will likely be closely watched to see if the tariff pause led to an improvement in sentiment.
This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.
Jamie Dimon, chief executive officer of JPMorgan Chase & Co., speaks during the 2025 National Retirement Summit in Washington, DC, US, on Wednesday, March 12, 2025.
Al Drago | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Wall Street titan Jamie Dimon said Thursday that a recession is still a serious possibility for the United States, even after the recent rollback of tariffs on China.
“If there’s a recession, I don’t know how big it will be or how long it will last. Hopefully we’ll avoid it, but I wouldn’t take it off the table at this point,” the JPMorgan Chase CEO said in an interview with Bloomberg Television.
Specifically, Dimon said he would defer to his bank’s economists, who put recession odds at close to a toss-up. Michael Feroli, the firm’s chief U.S. economist, said in a note to clients on Tuesday that the recession outlook is “still elevated, but now below 50%.”
Dimon’s comments come less than a week after the U.S. and China announced that they were sharply reducing tariffs on one another for 90 days. The U.S. has also implemented a 90-day pause for many tariffs on other nations.
Thursday’s comments mark a change for Dimon, who said last month before the China truce that a recession was likely.
He also said there is still “uncertainty” on the tariff front but the pauses are a positive for the economy and market.
“I think the right thing to do is to back off some of that stuff and engage in conversation,” Dimon said.
However, even with the tariff pauses, the import taxes on goods entering the United States are now sharply higher than they were last year and could cause economic damage, according to Dimon.
“Even at this level, you see people holding back on investment and thinking through what they want to do,” Dimon said.