Saturday, June 7, marks the 60th anniversary of Griswold v. Connecticut, the landmark Supreme Court decision that granted married people the right to contraception.[1] The Court extended the right to unmarried persons in 1972.
The Griswold decision was a pivotal moment in history, allowing millions to enjoy the health, economic, and social benefits of contraception. Contraception is essential health care, and one of the ten most significant public health achievements of the 20th century. Access to contraception improves physical health and well-being, lowers infant and maternal mortality rates, and helps mitigate symptoms of numerous chronic conditions. Additionally, contraception helps people achieve higher educational attainment, increases labor force participation for women,[2] and generates greater economic stability and mobility. Moreover, access to subsidized contraception reduces childhood poverty and adult poverty a generation later.
Despite this success, the right to contraception is under dire threat. Opponents to sexual and reproductive health care are chipping away at access to contraception in a number of ways, some of which are outlined below.
- Attacks on Abortion
Decades of anti-abortion attacks have limited access to contraception, which has become more prominent after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Anti-abortion laws force abortion clinics that also provide contraceptive services to close. Clinic closures and misinformation about the legality of certain contraceptives contributed to a sharp drop in the rate of prescriptions for contraceptives in states with abortion bans.
However, abortion ban states are not the only ones impacted by anti-abortion laws. Financial and operational challenges caused at least 17 clinics to close last year in states where abortion is legal, and another 17 have already closed in 2025. These clinics provided critical access to contraception, especially for underserved populations.
Alarmingly, in his Dobbs concurrence, Justice Thomas called on the Court to go further than overturning Roe and explicitly overturn Griswold. Yet, Republicans have repeatedly blocked efforts to pass federal legislation enshrining the right to contraception.
- Title X Funding Freeze
The Title X Federal Family Planning Program is the only federal program in the United States dedicated to providing family planning services to people with low incomes. Title X is a vital source of contraceptive care for over 2.8 million patients. The program has been underfunded for decades and has yet to recover from the attacks of the first Trump administration. Now the current Trump administration has dangerously withheld or decreased funds to all Title X grantees, impacting access to contraceptive services for millions. It is estimated that 874 clinics in 24 states are affected by the funding freeze.
If these funds are not quickly restored, many clinics will be forced to close and up to 834,000 people may lose access to Title X-funded care.
- Proposed Medicaid Funding Cuts
Medicaid is a cornerstone of sexual and reproductive health care, as federal law requires Medicaid to cover family planning services and supplies. As such, Medicaid accounts for 75 percent of all public dollars spent on family planning. Therefore, there may be no greater threat to access to contraception than the proposed cuts to Medicaid in the reconciliation bill making its way through Congress. The House-passed bill slashes billions of dollars from Medicaid, imposes dangerous work requirements, requires cost-sharing for some Medicaid expansion enrollees,[3] and creates new barriers for states, like capping Medicaid provider taxes. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that millions would lose coverage under this bill.
Additionally, the proposed cuts could further shrink provider networks, exacerbating family planning provider and clinic shortages. Furthermore, states struggling to fund their Medicaid budgets could reduce the family planning services available to Medicaid enrollees.
Cuts to Medicaid will mean millions fewer people will have access to contraception and only serve to further efforts to all-but-eliminate sexual and reproductive health care access in the United States.
- Defunding Reproductive Health Providers like Planned Parenthood
The House reconciliation bill also seeks to “defund” Planned Parenthood. Federal funds cannot be used for abortions except in very limited circumstances. However, conservatives continually seek to punish Planned Parenthood by prohibiting their clinics from receiving Medicaid reimbursement for the other essential services they provide, including contraceptive care, cancer screenings, prenatal care, and STI testing/treatment.
Conservatives are trying to remove Planned Parenthood from the Medicaid program in every way possible: via this bill, state legislation, and litigation. These efforts are particularly harmful given that more than half of Planned Parenthood patients are enrolled in Medicaid or other federal or state health programs, and 1 in 4 people have used a Planned Parenthood health center. If Planned Parenthood is “defunded,” nearly 200 health centers could close, and more than 1.1 million patients could lose access to contraceptive care.
- Undermining the Affordable Care Act
The House-passed reconciliation bill also seeks to undermine the Affordable Care Act (ACA) by making it harder for consumers to enroll in coverage through the ACA marketplaces. The bill prohibits automatic reenrollment, imposes arbitrary premium penalties, limits the annual open enrollment period, restricts special enrollment periods, and imposes new verification requirements that would burden both consumers and marketplaces.
The House bill would also impose new limits on abortion coverage by preventing marketplace plans that cover abortion services from receiving cost-sharing reductions. This provision will severely disrupt abortion coverage, especially in states that mandate such coverage through the ACA marketplaces.
By implementing administrative barriers that disproportionately target low-income people and underserved populations, the bill would make marketplace coverage more challenging to attain, less comprehensive, and less affordable. By making the Marketplaces less accessible, millions would be forced to go without health coverage and be unable to afford vital contraceptive services.
Conclusion
These are just some of the ways that opponents to sexual and reproductive health care are undermining the constitutional right to contraception. These threats accompany attacks on the ACA contraceptive coverage mandate, the dissemination of dangerous disinformation about the safety and efficacy of contraceptives, falsely equating emergency contraception with abortion, and limiting young people’s access to contraception.
As we celebrate 60 years since Griswold, we must acknowledge that the victory, which was always incomplete, is now at grave risk. We cannot let 60 years of progress come to a dangerous halt. We must dedicate ourselves to protecting access to contraception and never stop fighting until we achieve true contraceptive equity for all.
[1] In Griswold, the Supreme Court affirmed the right to privacy and ruled a law governing contraceptive use for married people was unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment.
[2] We employ “women” in limited instances when necessary to accurately reference legal terms or cisgender women-centered research. More inclusive policy language and research is needed to better service the needs of all people who need equitable access to reproductive and sexual health care.
[3] Expansion enrollees have low incomes and decades of research has shown that even low copays substantially reduce access to needed care.
