Infographic: How Does Where You Work Affect Your Contraceptive Coverage?
The Affordable Care Act’s requirement that most private health insurance plans provide contraceptive coverage has been the focus of ongoing litigation in the federal courts.
View the Latest: Courts
Filter
-
-
Poll: Majorities Favor a Range of Options to Expand Public Coverage, Including Medicare-for-All
News ReleaseAt a time when debate is beginning about a national Medicare-for-all plan and other approaches to expanding coverage through public programs, this month’s KFF Health Tracking poll examines Americans’ early opinion on a range of options under consideration.
-
Provider Payment And Access To Medicaid Services: A Summary of CMS’ May 6 Proposed Rule
Issue BriefThis brief summarizes the major provisions of a rule proposed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that would set forth state requirements for ensuring access to care in state Medicaid programs. It would apply to fee-for-service Medicaid, but not to Medicaid managed care programs.
-
Olmstead: I Did It
VideoThis Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured video segment returns to the plaintiffs of the Olmstead case five years after the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision. It reports on the impact of the decision for individuals with disabilities and some of the challenges that remain in the implementation of the court ruling.
-
The Supreme Court and Contraceptive Coverage: Legal and Policy Implications – Briefing and Panel Discussion
Event Date:EventOn Tuesday, March 11, two weeks before the hearings, Kaiser Family Foundation hosted a public briefing and panel discussion to discuss two upcoming Supreme Court cases brought forth by for-profit corporations that challenge the Affordable Care Act's requirement to cover contraceptives, and the implications these rulings have for the ACA, corporate and individual religious protections, and civil rights.
-
Potential Supreme Court Decision: Who Will Bear the Coverage “Burdens?”
Issue BriefThe Supreme Court is expected to reach a decision by the end of June, 2014 on the cases brought forth by Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties, two for profit corporations challenging the ACA’s contraceptive coverage requirement. The plaintiffs contend that the requirement that they include coverage for certain contraceptive services (emergency contraceptive pills and intrauterine devices) in the insurance plans “substantially burdens” both the corporation’s and the owners’ religious rights. During the arguments, several of the justices discussed the extent to which the corporations did or not did not have a choice in offering coverage to their workers. In this brief, we explore some of the factors influencing coverage decisions and possible consequences for women and employers given possible Supreme Court decision options: either upholding the contraceptive coverage requirement, or in favor of Hobby Lobby.
-
Legal Analysis of the Supreme Court Ruling on Hobby Lobby
FeatureThis chart looks at the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Hobby Lobby case involving the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) contraceptive coverage requirement. It examines how the Court answered four key questions in the case.
-
What Women Think of the Core Issue in the Hobby Lobby Case
From Drew AltmanThis was published as a Wall Street Journal Think Tank column on June 30, 2014. The Supreme Court decision upholding Hobby Lobby’s ability to refuse to cover certain contraceptive services based on its owners’ religious beliefs has set off a wave of analysis of what the decision means. That will not be resolved anytime soon.
-
Round 3: Legal Challenges to Contraceptive Coverage at SCOTUS
Issue BriefThis brief explains how the new regulations issued by the Trump Administration would change the contraceptive coverage requirement for employers and affect women’s coverage, the legal positions for challenging and defending these regulations, the potential rulings, and the broader ramifications.
-
Litigation Challenging Mandatory Stay at Home and Other Social Distancing Measures
Issue BriefThis issue brief explains the legal basis for stay at home orders and provides an overview of current legal challenges filed in state and federal courts.