Postelection analyses continue to ignore the political and economic power of Latinas. The big story about the Latino vote is that the electoral bets the Trump and Harris campaigns made to galvanize men of color paid off for MAGA extremists. But both candidates’ willful neglect of Latina voters is another threat to American democracy.

Many are saying this election was a referendum on the economy and needs of working-class voters. Where do Latinas fit into that story?

Latinas made up about 12% of all registered female voters in 2024. They constituted more than 20% of registered voters in five important states: Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico and Texas. Despite being the nation’s most underpaid demographic group, in 2021 Latinas contributed $1.3 trillion to the nation’s gross domestic product, an amount larger than the economy of Florida. This year they headed to the ballot box with their wallets, livelihoods and futures on the line. And they did not back the GOP: Exit polls estimate that 3 in 5 Latina voters supported Vice President Kamala Harris. For the third time they rejected MAGA extremism in the face of majority support for the Trump ticket by non-Hispanic white voters, both men and women.

Yet the 2024 election did show that the significant shifts toward former President Trump included Latinos. The polls indicate that a majority of Latino men supported the Republican presidential ticket for the first time since data on Latino voters have been collected, and the share of Latina voters supporting the Democratic ticket has narrowed over the last three cycles with Trump as the Republican nominee.

Messaging around the economy has been deemed the real takeaway from this election cycle. Yet neither party offered voters a comprehensive approach or addressed the issues of most concern to Latinos.

Both campaigns failed to address the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Great Recession, both of which annihilated Latino households in terms of their health and wealth. Latinos were disproportionately affected by the pandemic, causing many to exit the workforce to care for their families less than a decade after their demographic lost 66% of their wealth in the housing crisis. Worse, neither campaign’s economic messaging spoke to Latinas. At the 11th hour, the Harris campaign rolled out an “opportunity agenda” for Latino men with no equivalent for Latinas.

Electoral postmortems have reinforced the invisibility of Latina voters and their contributions to the American economy. Their economic grievances, like those of men of color, are well-founded even if they did not react to them by voting for Trump.

Our recent report at Latina Futures 2050 Lab reveals a troubling disparity in hourly wages, placing Latinas at the bottom of the earnings spectrum in America. To achieve the weekly earnings of non-Hispanic white men, Latinas have to work 64 hours — 24 beyond the typical workweek. Rather than shrinking with educational attainment, the wage gap with white men in fact widens among the college-educated. Research suggests that for Latinas who enter the workforce today, the wage disparity amounts to more than $1.2 million over the 40 years of a typical career.

Latinas are also now more likely than Latino men to be their households’ breadwinners, partly as a result of their higher educational attainment. Their households are often multi-generational, including spouses, children and elderly family members, creating a heavier financial burden with each additional dependent. In the face of inflation and rising inequality, Latinas’ earnings have been insufficient to survive, let alone thrive.

The economy consistently ranks as a top issue for Latinas, with two-thirds identifying the wage gap as a big problem in a Pew survey this year. So why did the majority still support the Democratic ticket this election? And why is there a large well-documented gender gap for Gen Z between young Latina voters, who overwhelmingly backed Harris, and their male peers, who supported Trump?

Perhaps women also prioritized issues such as democracy and abortion, which mattered far more to Harris voters. And Trump’s repeated invitations this cycle to men of color to join the MAGA movement catapulted his misogyny — pledges to “protect women” whether they “like it or not” — to new, persuadable audiences. Whatever the reasons, Latino men’s support for Trump seemed to overcome their party affiliation — most lean Democrat — and down-ballot choices, with Democratic Senate wins in Arizona and Nevada.

The GOP’s uniform control of the Oval Office, Senate and House of Representatives come January confirms that voters believe they were better off four years ago than they are now. Yet Democrats must not heed calls to pander selectively to Latino men. Instead they must also meaningfully engage Latina voters, who have higher electoral participation rates and preferences for the Democratic ticket than their male peers.

If candidates and parties continue to overlook the economic needs of Latina voters, they risk alienating one of America’s most influential blocs. According to data from the National Women’s Law Center and the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, Georgia, a swing state, ranks 45th in the nation for wage equity among Latinas; Texas and California, where Latinos are the plurality population, rank 48th and 50th respectively (despite the latter’s reputation as a progressive stronghold).

In the Golden State and elsewhere, Latinas will not wait quietly for change. They want to see economic justice delivered, not deferred.

Sonja Diaz is a civil rights attorney and co-founder of the Latina Futures 2050 Lab.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro is siding with the state’s high court after the justices ruled that faulty mail-in ballots can’t be counted amid a contentious recount, delivering a victory to Republican Party officials.

The state Supreme Court reaffirmed its prior decision in a 4–3 ruling Monday that counties cannot count incorrectly dated or undated ballots. The decision singled out the Boards of Elections in Bucks County, Montgomery County, and Philadelphia County, whom they said “SHALL COMPLY with the prior rulings of this Court in which we have clarified” for mail-in and absentee ballots in their Nov. 1 ruling.

“Any insinuation that our laws can be ignored or do not matter is irresponsible and does damage to faith in our electoral process,” said Shapiro, a Democrat. “The rule of law matters in Pennsylvania. … It is critical for counties in both parties to respect it with both their rhetoric and their actions.”

As governor, Shapiro said he would “continue working to protect our democracy and the votes of all eligible Pennsylvanians.”

REPUBLICANS FILE 12 PENNSYLVANIA LAWSUITS IN ‘AGGRESSIVE’ PUSH TO END RECOUNT

The high court initially ruled on Nov. 1 that mail-in ballots without formally required signatures or dates should not be counted. Democratic-led election boards, however — including in Philadelphia, Bucks County, Montgomery County, and Centre County — balked at the ruling and voted to include such ballots in the recount. 

“People violate laws any time they want,” Democratic Bucks County commissioner Diane Ellis-Marseglia said last week, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer. “So, for me, if I violate this law it’s because I want a court to pay attention. There’s nothing more important than counting votes.”

Monday’s ruling came amid a slew of lawsuits filed by Republican Party officials in the midst of an aggressive Senate recount effort following the narrow victory of GOP candidate David McCormick over three-term Democrat Sen. Bob Casey. 

‘ABSOLUTE LAWLESSNESS’: GOP BLASTS PA. DEMS’ RECOUNT EFFORT IN CASEY SENATE LOSS

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court reaffirmed its prior decision in a 4–3 ruling Monday that counties cannot count incorrectly dated or undated ballots.  (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

McCormick had defeated Casey by some 17,000 ballots in the state, or within the 0.5% margin of error. The narrow victory allowed Casey to qualify for an automatic recount under Pennsylvania law.

The Republican National Committee criticized Shapiro for not speaking up sooner in defense of the court’s actions. 

“Heartening to see. Once Democrats came to the conclusion that even ignoring the Pennsylvania Supreme Court can’t scrape up enough ballots to win…,” RNC Chair Michael Whatley wrote on X. “Governor Shapiro suddenly discovers that he stands with the rule of law. Better late than never.”

Democrat Sen. Bob Casey and Republican Dave McCormick, who defeated Casey by some 17,000 votes in the race for the Senate.  (Getty Images)

Trump campaign official Chris LaCivita said Pennsylvania elections officials would face jail time for counting incorrect mail-in ballots.  

“They will go to jail,” he wrote Sunday evening on X. “Count on it.”

Fox News Digital’s Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report. 

When Mars Wright saw that Donald Trump had been elected again as president, the 29-year-old Los Angeles artist and streetwear designer felt relieved he had already undergone surgeries for his gender transition.

Wright, a transgender man, has chronicled his medical journey online, flexing and dancing to show how his body transformed after a masculinization procedure he nicknamed “Dorito chip” for the way it altered his shape. His surgery was covered under an L.A. Care plan he obtained through Covered California, the marketplace set up under the Affordable Care Act for Californians to purchase insurance.

“I’m privileged to be here,” Wright said of living in California. “And I think about how people are going to have to come here … to be able to have medical transition.”

California leaders have sought to protect access to such procedures for transgender people. Health plans licensed by the state must provide transgender enrollees with medically necessary gender-affirming care. Doctors who provide such care in California are legally shielded from laws criminalizing it in other states.

But experts and advocates said that even in California, access to gender-affirming care could be undermined by federal action as Trump takes office for a second time, pledging to stop “left-wing gender insanity” and calling gender transition for minors a form of child abuse. State lawmakers have pledged to push back against efforts to obstruct gender-affirming care, which could tee up future battles in court.

“I’m not going to sit here and say that California can turn back every despicable federal attack on trans people,” said state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who has backed protections for transgender patients and their doctors. “But we are going to do everything in our power to stick up for the community.”

President-elect Trump has vowed to press Congress to block the use of federal funds for gender-affirming care including surgery, a position also reflected in the Republican party platform. Exactly how a ban would be imposed remains to be seen, but experts said the Trump administration could model it on the Hyde Amendment, which for decades has broadly banned using federal funds for abortion.

Eliminating federal funding would have sweeping effects, because “pretty much every corner of the healthcare system has some element of federal funding in it,” said Kellan E. Baker, executive director of the Whitman-Walker Institute, which does research and advocacy on health issues for LGBTQ people. Its effects “would fall most significantly on those who are least positioned to be able to afford the healthcare they need.”

Among those affected, he said, would be transgender people who rely on public programs such as Medicaid. However, experts said that because Medicaid is jointly funded by states and the federal government, California leaders could choose to use state funds to pay for gender-affirming care.

“California has shown a predilection for funding things that are over and above what Medicaid nationally will do,” such as covering low-income Californians regardless of immigration status, said John Baackes, chief executive of L.A. Care, a health plan serving more than 2 million people across L.A. County. “The state could say, ‘OK — we’ll fund it.’”

Trump is also expected to seek changes to Medicaid that would reduce federal spending, which could strain for California financially if it wants to continue other existing programs under Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program. But advocates said because transgender people are a small share of the population — estimated at 0.6% of U.S. teens and adults in one analysis — shouldering costs for gender-affirming care wouldn’t be a major expense.

Experts said states have wide latitude over their spending, but Trump has tried to use Medicaid to pressure California over its policies before. Near the end of his first term, the Trump administration threatened to withhold some Medicaid funding from California because the state required insurers to cover abortion care.

That threat ultimately fizzled, but it could hint at how his administration might try to pressure California. A Trump representative didn’t respond to an email seeking comment on that possibility.

At clinics run by the Los Angeles LGBT Center, anxious patients are asking, “Should I get a year’s worth of hormones now? Should I do all the surgeries I’ve ever wanted to do?” said Dr. Kaiyti Duffy, its chief medical officer. She has tried to assure them that “as long as we can provide these services, we will.”

Trump could also pursue more sweeping restrictions that not only bar the use of federal dollars for gender-affirming care, but prohibit providers of such care from getting federal funding.

Some of his proposals specifically target gender-affirming care for youth, which has been a focal point for groups that contend it harms children who don’t understand the implications of such treatment. Greg Burt, vice president of the California Family Council, called it “the biggest lie that this state has ever perpetrated on our young people, to tell kids that it’s possible to be born in the wrong body.”

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that transgender youth have access to comprehensive gender-affirming care.

In the Central Valley, one mother said puberty blockers had been a “pause button” that relieved despair for her transgender child, who is now 14, and gave the family time to figure out what he needed. The military family, who rely on Tricare insurance for service members that is federally funded, consulted with doctors and eventually moved forward with hormonal treatment with testosterone.

“At every stage of medical care, he became more and more himself,” said the mother, who asked not to be identified to protect the privacy of her teen. “He switched from being silent and quiet to active and alive and thriving.”

If her child is blocked from getting such care in California, she said, they are making plans to leave the country.

Trump has called to prohibit gender-affirming care for youth in every state, calling it mutilation. During the campaign, Trump said he would seek to terminate any healthcare provider that “participates in the chemical or physical mutilation of minor youth” from Medicaid and Medicare.

The Medicare and Medicaid programs are “the biggest lever that the federal government has because hospitals get so much money” from them, said Julianna S. Gonen, director of federal policy for the National Center for Lesbian Rights. The threat of losing it “is so severe that hospitals will probably comply before they run the risk of being terminated from the programs.”

Experts said the White House could also seek a federal determination that such care is dangerous or experimental, which would reverberate through federally funded programs.

Alejandra Caraballo, a clinical instructor at the Cyberlaw Clinic at Harvard Law, said for many healthcare providers, “when the risk is you losing your federal funding — which means your ability to operate — it’s easier to just drop a trans patient.”

The Trump administration could also roll back federal regulations that bar healthcare providers from denying care to transgender patients if the same kind of care is provided to others. However, California has its own rules prohibiting health plans from denying care based on gender identity.

The Trump administration could also try to clamp down on hormonal therapy through Food and Drug Administration regulations, some believe. However, Amanda McAllister-Wallner, interim executive director of the consumer advocacy group Health Access California, said trying to pinpoint who is providing “gender-affirming care” could be thorny for federal officials because such interventions are also used for other conditions.

“It’s not necessarily obvious — was this service being provided because of someone’s diagnosis of gender dysphoria or for some other reason?” McAllister-Wallner said.

One study of insured patients published in JAMA Network Open found that in a recent year, breast reductions for trans youth were far outnumbered by ones for boys who are not transgender. Researchers said surgeries for transgender teenagers were “rare and almost entirely chest-related procedures” and found no surgeries on trans youth ages 12 or under.

Before election day, Bamby Salcedo planned to push for improvements to gender-affirming care through a Medi-Cal initiative called CalAIM. The election shunted that effort to the back burner, said Salcedo, president and chief executive of the TransLatin@ Coalition, an advocacy group founded by transgender women in L.A.

In its aftermath, Salcedo was continuing to push for an L.A. County budget allocation to support the needs of trans people, saying local government needs to step up. And she was also busy planning for a fashion show celebrating 15 years of her organization, calling it a chance “for that one night to bring joy to our people.”

“In whatever way possible, we are going to get through this,” she said.

Mars Wright, poses for a photo. Wright was able to get body masculinization surgery through Covered California insurance

(Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

Wright was among the designers being showcased at the event. Before getting his surgical procedures, he said, “I was scared to date. I was scared to wear clothes that I liked. I was scared to go to the beach.” Now, he joked, “I can’t keep my shirt on.”

“I’m at a place where I love being trans.”