Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act prohibits discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, age, and disability in health programs and activities receiving federal funds. Here are the significant ways HHS’s final rule would narrow the scope of this regulation.

This brief summarizes the status and implications of the Trump Administration final regulations, published in December 2019, that change how ACA Marketplace plans that include coverage for abortion must bill and consumers must pay premiums for that coverage.

This brief details the federal programs affected by the Hyde Amendment, provides estimates on the share of women insured by Medicaid affected by the law, reviews the impact of the law on their access to abortion services, and discusses the potential effect if the law were to be repealed.

This data note presents an interactive map that tracks which states have made declarations defining abortions as non-essential or elective health procedures and effectively blocking the provision of abortion services during the outbreak.

This fact sheet summarizes the major statutory requirements and policies pertaining to U.S. global family planning/reproductive health (FP/RH) efforts over time and identifies those currently in effect, including the Mexico City Policy and the Kemp-Kasten Amendment.

An overview of the Mexico City Policy, which requires foreign NGOs to certify that they will not “perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning” using funds from any source (including non-U.S. funds) as a condition for receiving most U.S. government global health assistance.

This issue brief explains the legal and factual issues in dispute and the reviews the potential implications of different rulings in the case of June Medical Services v. Russo, which could have significant implications for women’s access to abortion and could eliminate the right of abortion providers to bring legal challenges to state and federal laws and policies.

Several reproductive health care services have been considered “elective” and postponed during the pandemic. While much of the care deemed “non-essential” isn’t life-threatening, delaying care for too long can result in negative health outcomes.

This brief analyzes how states, health systems and providers have been faced with deciding what health care is “essential” verses “elective” during the COVID-19 crisis, and what the possible consequences are to delays in “non-essential” reproductive health care.

A new Coronavirus Policy Watch post from KFF explores how state responses to limit abortion access during the COVID-19 pandemic has drawn renewed attention to the provision of medication abortion using telemedicine approaches.  Medication abortion via telemedicine is a method that can be used to safely provide women with access…