We begin today’s roundup with Peter Slevin at The New Yorker, who interviews progressive Representative Pramila Jayapal on the successes of the Biden-Harris administration so far:

Edward-Isaac Dovere at The Atlantic analyzes the vice-presidency of Kamala Harris:

In the Senate, she was a lead sponsor of a bill expanding community development financial institutions, which provided billions in relief to businesses hit by the effects of COVID-19; as vice president, she has touted the inclusion of CDFIs in Biden’s American Rescue Plan. In meetings, she often weed-whacks her way through political-speak to emphasize what’s really at stake. At the end of March, for example, she paused a conversation with women leaders at the White House to point out that the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour isn’t just an abstraction. People who work 40 hours a week at that rate make only $15,000 a year, she said, in the kind of moment that tends to happen behind the scenes but was caught by a pool reporter. “Let’s deal with that,” she said. “Let’s deal with the fact that one in three of those are women of color.”

Meanwhile, law professors Leah Litman and Melissa Murray sound the alarm on the right to choice, which may be threatened by a new case before the Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court, with its newly constituted 6-to-3 conservative supermajority, is about to show the country its true colors. On Monday morning, the court agreed to hear a challenge to a Mississippi law that would ban most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy — a case that poses a direct attack on the constitutional right to abortion.

The decision to take the case was unsurprising. President Donald Trump vowed to appoint justices who would overrule Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision holding that women have a constitutional right to obtain abortions. With Trump’s three historic appointments to the high court, all that opponents of Roe needed was the right vehicle. The Mississippi case gives them just that. It will be heard in the court’s term beginning in October. […] 

It would not be unthinkable for this Supreme Court to use the Mississippi case to jettison Roe and Casey. Although stare decisis and its principle of respect for settled precedents has long been a hallmark of U.S. law, this court has in recent years refused to be bound by established precedents.

On a final note, Dana Milbank at The Washington Post highlights how civics education is under attack by the Republican Party:

Pretty much everything the Trump-occupied Republican Party has been doing these days violates the basic tenets of democracy that American schoolchildren are taught.

But the Trumpy right has come up with an elegant remedy to relieve the cognitive dissonance: They want to cancel civics education. If the voters don’t know how the government is supposed to function, they’ll be none the wiser when it malfunctions — which has been pretty much all the time. […] 

A bipartisan bill in Congress sponsored by Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas and Republican Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma (Disclosure: My wife’s stepmother, Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, is one of the bill’s Democratic sponsors), would authorize $1 billion a year in grants to pay for more civics and history programs that teach children “to understand American Government and engage in American democratic practices as citizens and residents of the United States.” It’s as American — and as anodyne — as apple pie.

But, as The Post’s Laura Meckler reported over the weekend, “Conservative media and activists are pelting the Republicans who support the bill to abandon it. They call the grant program a ‘Trojan horse’ that would allow the Biden administration to push a liberal agenda.”