NCRP’s Response to Regressive SCOTUS 2026 Decisions
Indigenous sovereignty. Reproductive justice. Birthright citizenship. Trans rights. Voting rights. Civil rights.
Whether the decisions were favorable or unfavorable, the cases of the 2026 Supreme Court session are not isolated. These rulings are just the latest example of the impressive decades-long tactics by regressive funders. For more than a generation, regressive funders have provided patient, flexible capital to not only pursue their less just vision of the world, but to weather setbacks long enough to bring the vision to fruition.
In this spirit, NCRP welcomes the Supreme Court’s decision to preserve the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) through Reyelts v. State of Minnesota. This ruling is a necessary step towards recognizing the wellbeing of Indigenous kids, the sovereignty of Native tribes, and the consensus of constitutional scholars. Yet as we celebrate, we must remember: this verdict does not erase the ongoing legacy of colonial theft, violence, and broken promises to Indigenous communities. This regressive court strategy has stalled for now, but this case does not exist in a vacuum. NCRP has been watching. Right-wing advocates like the Goldwater Institute received steady funding to drive this case over and over again, receiving $11 million in contributions in 2024 alone.
The answer is not episodic funding, it’s generational investment into Indigenous leaders and organizers.
While ICWA was maintained, First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Davenport passed in an unanimous decision. This decision authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch shifts how accountability happens. It will make investigating the deceptive behaviors of crisis pregnancy centers even more difficult.
In response to this loss for the Reproductive Justice movement, NCRP will continue to examine funder ecosystems, and collect publicly available data through community-centered resource approaches. Reproductive Justice leaders have always had to innovate through the harshest of environments; they have the wisdom and know how to fight this battle, but they require deeper investment to do the work.
The philanthropic sector needs to listen and take their role seriously. Funders must move resources to long-term research capacity, regional data collection, legal partnerships, comms infrastructure and the development of frontline efforts and strategies.
The Supreme Court case of Trump v. Barbara challenging birthright citizenship was technically upheld birthright citizenship in a 6-3 vote. With this slight margin, progressive philanthropists should take heed – funders need to increase giving and move money more quickly and more equitably. As