The independent source for health policy research, polling, and news.
KFF’s policy research provides facts and analysis on a wide range of policy issues and public programs.
KFF designs, conducts and analyzes original public opinion and survey research on Americans’ attitudes, knowledge, and experiences with the health care system to help amplify the public’s voice in major national debates.
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the organization’s core operating programs.
Less than a month after CMS released its interim final rule on Medicaid work requirements, 24 states, including DC, sued the Trump administration over its interpretation of the 2025 reconciliation law’s requirements — including most notably the medical frailty exemption.
This brief describes the new executive order, examines the intersection of homelessness and mental illness, reviews the history of the deinstitutionalization movement, and discusses specialized treatment services for people with SMI.
One significant element of the pending U.S. Supreme Court case challenging the Affordable Care Act is the constitutionality of the law's Medicaid expansion. This provision of the law requires states that choose to participate in the Medicaid program to cover nearly all adults under age 65 with household incomes at or below 133% of the federal poverty level as of January 2014. A ruling on the Medicaid expansion could have far-reaching impacts on the present…
This brief overviews the Biden Administration’s 2024 final rule implementing Section 1557 of the ACA, which is home to the law’s major nondiscrimination provisions. It provides a brief background on 1557 rulemaking and identifies key differences between this rule and the 2020 rule from the Trump Administration. It highlights two areas of growing interest impacted by the rule – nondiscrimination protections related to pregnancy and nondiscrimination protections for transgender people. Table 2 summarizes the major…
A map and table showing the number of people now receiving premium subsidies who would lose them if the Court finds for the challengers; the total amount of federal subsidy dollars; the average subsidy (or average premium tax credit) that subsidized enrollees have qualified for; and the average increase in premiums that subsidized enrollees would face if the subsidies are disallowed.
On June 28, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a longstanding legal precedent that required federal courts to defer to reasonable agency interpretation when statutes are ambiguous. The decision will shift many policy decisions from federal agencies to federal judges, with implications for health policy that will reverberate for years to come. This issue brief examines the decision and assesses what’s ahead.
In the wake of the 2022 midterm elections, KFF's analysis of KFF/AP VoteCast supplemental questions shows how abortion and the overturn of Roe v. Wade played a factor in the election by motiving key voting blocks.
On January 20, 2015, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, a case that raises the issue of whether Medicaid providers can challenge a state law in federal court on the basis that it violates the federal Medicaid Act and therefore is preempted by the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This issue brief examines the major questions raised by the Armstrong case, explains the parties’ legal…
June 2014 marks the 15th anniversary of the United States Supreme Court’s landmark civil rights decision in Olmstead v. L.C., finding that the unjustified institutionalization of people with disabilities is illegal discrimination. This issue brief examines the legacy of Olmstead, with an emphasis on legal case developments and policy trends emerging in the last five years and the related contributions of the Medicaid program.
On June 28, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). A majority of the Court also found the ACA’s Medicaid expansion unconstitutionally coercive of states, while a different majority of the Court held that this issue was fully remedied by limiting the Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary’s enforcement authority. The practical effect of the Court's decision makes the Medicaid expansion optional for states. This brief addresses questions…
© 2026 KFF