Now that it has been seven months since the Heritage Foundation released its latest policy blueprint known as “Project 2026,” headlines, we are breaking down the parts you missed. And what you missed was the blueprint’s language around its preferred family structure — and how those recommendations could shape the lives of affect Black women as well as Black LGBTQ+ families.
At the center of the report, “Saving America by Saving the Family,” is the idea that the U.S. faces a “family crisis” driven by declining marriage and birth rates. Although many researchers, including the Independent Institute, point to economic pressures as the main reason Americans are delaying marriage or having fewer children, the Heritage Foundation argues cultural changes, including feminism, are to blame.
“Second-wave feminism and the sexual revolution promoted an individualistic, child-free, marriage-free, sexual ‘liberation’ that promised to lead to an unparalleled era of consent-based human happiness and fulfillment,” Project 2026 reads. “Over the course of 60 years, casual sex, abortion, childlessness by choice, and no-fault divorce became normalized, while marriage and the natural family became stigmatized.”
RELATED: Black America Must Know The Terrifying Success of Project 2025
Specifically, the authors blamed landmark legislation like Roe v. Wade, which was overturned in 2022, for why birth rates continue to decline in 2026. Supporters say the agenda is about rebuilding communities and encouraging stable households. Critics argue it promotes a narrow definition of family and uses government policy to elevate one vision of American life over others.
The blueprint recommends policies that would make marriage and childbearing federal priorities, expand Christian approaches to social services and reconsider who is legally allowed to become a family.
“Sixty years ago, there was no public debate about the definition of marriage or whether it involved a man and a woman,” the 130-page document reads. “The LGBTQ agenda, through the Supreme Court of the United States, redefined marriage and severed it in law from its natural biological function and purpose of reproduction.”
These recommendations, which — according to the document– “favor natural marriage over same-sex and polyamorous relationships, cohabitation, or intentional single parenthood” could have broad consequences for LGBTQ+ communities, critics say.
Single parents and women across the board could be impacted. And for Black Americans, the debate carries particular weight.
The Heritage Foundation’s focus on family structure builds on a long-running conservative argument that marriage rates and family structure are central to addressing economic challenges in Black communities.
But Black scholars, activists and civil rights leaders have pushed back against that framework, arguing that it often overlooks the lasting effects of slavery, segregation, housing discrimination, mass incarceration and economic inequality, according to the Hoover Institution. They say Black families have long demonstrated resilience through extended family networks, grandparents raising children, multigenerational households and other forms of caregiving.
Critics warn that policies centered on a single “ideal” family structure could disproportionately affect Black women, who are more likely to lead households, as well as Black LGBTQ+ families. They argue that supporting families should focus on expanding access to affordable housing, child care, health care, education and economic opportunity rather than defining which families deserve recognition.
Still, Project 2026’s view of family sounds like utopia to many of its supporters. “In a rational world, one would not need to define terms such as man, woman, mother, and father,” it reads. “In the current world, we must do so. Mothers are female parents and fathers are male parents.”
The controversy surrounding Project 2026 reflects a broader debate over the role of government in private life. Supporters see the blueprint as a roadmap for strengthening American families. Opponents see it as an effort to reshape society around a specific ideological vision.
