HB 2535
In CommitteeHouse
Postsecondary/med. abortion
Concerning access at public postsecondary educational institutions to medication abortion.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill requires Washington’s public colleges and universities to expand access to medication abortion for students by offering it directly through student health centers or via robust referral and telehealth support. It also mandates clear information and resources on reproductive health services and academic accommodations for pregnancy-related care. The goal is to reduce travel, cost, and wait time barriers that students currently face in accessing abortion care.
- By the start of the 2027–28 academic year, every student health center at a public postsecondary institution must offer medication abortion through a state reproductive health program, a telehealth partnership with a safety net provider, or another cost-effective method.
- Public institutions without student health centers must provide information and referral services for medication abortion, including training staff on available resources and ensuring private, accessible spaces and devices for telehealth appointments.
- All public institutions must maintain a dedicated webpage with clear information about reproductive health services—including prenatal care and abortion options—and links to academic accommodation resources and state health department abortion information.
- The bill defines medication abortion using the same legal definition as state law (RCW 69.41.050) and establishes a new chapter in Title 28B RCW to govern implementation.
Who is affected
- Students at public postsecondary institutions — Students at public colleges and universities in Washington who may need abortion care as part of their reproductive health services; they gain improved access to medication abortion on or near campus, reducing travel time and cost.
- Student health center staff and campus health administrators — Student health centers at public institutions must develop or expand services to include medication abortion or provide robust referral pathways; they will need to coordinate with state health programs and train staff.
- Public institutions without student health centers — Public institutions without on-campus health centers must ensure students can access information and telehealth support for abortion care; they must train support staff and provide private, accessible spaces for virtual care.
- State agencies (e.g., Washington Student Achievement Council, Department of Health) — State agencies like the Washington Student Achievement Council and Department of Health will play supporting roles in coordinating services, maintaining resource directories, and ensuring telehealth infrastructure.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Students—especially low-income, rural, and first-generation students—will experience significantly reduced travel time, out-of-pocket costs, and wait times for abortion care, directly improving health outcomes and academic continuity. Research cited in the bill confirms medication abortion in campus settings is safe, effective, and feasible.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(a), Sec. 1(3), Sec. 1(4)Mandating academic accommodations and clear referral pathways for pregnancy-related care reduces the risk of students dropping out due to unmanaged health needs, supporting retention and graduation—particularly for vulnerable populations like student parents or those experiencing housing instability.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 3(3)(b)(i)-(ii), Sec. 1(3)Ensuring private, accessible telehealth spaces and device access on campus protects student privacy and autonomy in reproductive decision-making, especially critical for students who cannot disclose their care to family or partners due to safety or financial dependence.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 3(2)(b)(ii)-(iv), Sec. 1(4)Standardizing and publicly surfacing reproductive health information—including abortion options—reduces misinformation and empowers students to make informed decisions, promoting health equity across diverse student populations.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 3(3)(a), Sec. 1(5)Using cost-effective methods (e.g., telehealth partnerships with safety net providers) may reduce long-term costs by preventing complications from delayed care and improving student retention—yielding savings in remedial academic support and social services over time.
FinancialPeopleRef: Fiscal Impact (summary), Sec. 3(1)(b)
Potential Concerns (5)
Expanding medication abortion access through student health centers may strain limited campus health resources, potentially reducing availability of other essential services (e.g., mental health counseling, STI screening) if staffing and funding do not scale accordingly. This could delay or diminish care for other urgent health needs.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(a), Sec. 3(2)Requiring institutions without student health centers to provide private telehealth spaces, devices, and technical support may impose unplanned operational and maintenance costs on smaller or under-resourced institutions (e.g., community colleges, regional campuses), potentially diverting funds from academic programming or infrastructure.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 3(2)(b)(ii)-(iv)Implementation of medication abortion services or robust referral systems may require institutions to hire or retrain clinical staff (e.g., nurse practitioners, physicians), which could strain human resource capacity—especially in rural or low-enrollment campuses—potentially increasing reliance on temporary or contract labor.
Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(b), Sec. 3(2)Maintaining a dedicated webpage with abortion-related information may expose institutions to political or legal challenges, particularly if future administrations or state officials object to the content, potentially requiring legal review or redesign of web content—adding administrative overhead.
EducationLean peopleRef: Sec. 3(3)(a), Sec. 3(3)(b)(iii)While the bill emphasizes cost-effective implementation, the actual fiscal burden on institutions is uncertain—some may absorb costs through existing health center budgets, while others may need new appropriations, potentially competing with other student service priorities.
FinancialRef: Fiscal Impact (summary), Sec. 3(1)(b)
Who Is Most Affected
Students—especially low-income, rural, first-generation, and undocumented students—will benefit most, as they face the highest barriers to off-campus care (transportation, cost, time). Improved on-campus access supports health equity and academic persistence.
Student health staff (nurses, nurse practitioners, counselors) may see increased demand for reproductive care training and coordination, but the bill provides a framework for integration with existing safety-net providers—potentially expanding their scope without requiring full clinical expansion at every campus.
Smaller or rural institutions without student health centers will need to invest in telehealth infrastructure and staff training. While the bill mandates cost-effective solutions, these schools may face disproportionate administrative burden relative to their budgets.
The Washington Student Achievement Council and Department of Health will coordinate referral networks and maintain resource directories—adding administrative tasks but aligning with existing reproductive health infrastructure. No major structural changes required.