In this June 2018 post for The JAMA Forum, Larry Levitt examines the potential impact of the Trump Administration’s legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

A new issue brief from the Kaiser Family Foundation explains the June 29 federal court ruling invalidating the Kentucky HEALTH Medicaid waiver program and its implications for other states. The DC Federal District Court decision in Stewart v. Azar blocked Kentucky from implementing the waiver on July 1, including its…

This issue brief summarizes the DC federal district court’s June 29, 2018 decision in Stewart v. Azar, the lawsuit brought by Medicaid enrollees challenging the HHS Secretary’s approval of the Kentucky HEALTH Section 1115 waiver program, which includes a work requirement, premiums, coverage lockouts, and other provisions that the state estimated would lead 95,000 people to lose coverage.

The latest Kaiser Health Tracking Poll examines the public’s attitudes, with a focus on views of women ages 18-44, toward several key women’s issues including workplace protections and reproductive health – as well as the role that these issues may play in the 2018 midterm elections.

In an Axios column, Drew Altman analyzes the narrowing gap between growth in health spending and GDP and discusses why it matters. The big question, he says, is will the narrowing have staying power?

Before the ACA was passed, many states had enacted contraceptive equity laws that required plans to treat contraceptives in the same way they covered other services. In addition, since the ACA was passed, a number of states have enacted laws that basically codify in state legislation the ACA benefit rules. This issue brief provides an update on the status of the continuing litigation on the federal contraceptive requirement and explains the interplay between the federal and state contraceptive coverage laws and the implications for employers and women.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires most private health insurance plans to provide coverage for a broad range of preventive services including FDA approved prescription contraceptives and services for women. Legal challenges and recently issued rules have affected contraceptive coverage for many women.

This short fact sheet answers questions about how where a woman works may affect the contraceptive coverage she may receive.

In this Medium post, Alina Salganicoff outlines the legal arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court case Zubik v. Burwell and discusses what the case could mean for contraceptive coverage.

In this post on The Huffington Post, Alina Salganicoff and Laurie Sobel offer a Q&A on “contraceptive-only” plans, an approach mentioned during oral arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court case Zubik v. Burwell. In the Zubik case, a group of religiously affiliated nonprofits with religious objections to providing birth control coverage seek an exemption from the Affordable Care Act’s provision requiring most plans to offer such coverage without cost-sharing.