Skip to main content
Evergreen Ledger

SSB 5321

In Committee

Senate

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?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: January 29, 2025
Last Action: January 12, 2026
Status: S Ways & Means
View Bill Text (HTML) (opens in new tab)View Bill Text (PDF) (opens in new tab)

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill requires all public colleges and universities in Washington to ensure students have access to medication abortion—a safe, non-surgical option to end a pregnancy—by the 2026–27 academic year. It mandates that student health centers offer the service directly or through telehealth or state programs, and that schools without health centers provide referrals and support for telehealth appointments. It also requires campuses to post clear reproductive health information online and help students get academic accommodations when needed.

  • By the start of the 2026–27 academic year, every student health center at a public postsecondary institution must offer access to medication abortion, either on-site, via telehealth, or through a state-run reproductive health program.
  • Public institutions without a student health center must provide referrals to qualified providers, including at least two options (e.g., clinics and telehealth services), and ensure private space, devices, and technical support for telehealth appointments upon student request.
  • All public institutions must maintain a public health services website with clear, accessible information about reproductive health—including options for pregnancy termination—and links to academic accommodation resources for pregnancy-related needs.
  • The bill defines key terms (e.g., *medication abortion*, *student health center*) and establishes a new chapter in Title 28B of the Revised Code of Washington to codify these requirements.

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 through their campus health centers or through campus-provided referrals and support for telehealth appointments.
  • Public colleges and universities (and their student health centers) — Student health centers at public colleges and universities must expand services to include medication abortion or provide robust referral and telehealth support; this may require staffing, training, infrastructure, and coordination with external providers.
  • State agencies involved in higher education oversight — State agencies like the Washington Student Achievement Council (WSAC) may be tasked with oversight or coordination of implementation, though the bill does not assign them direct operational responsibilities.
Effective: July 28, 2025Fiscal impact: The bill does not specify a dollar amount, but fiscal impact is likely modest to moderate—mainly for campus health centers implementing medication abortion services (e.g., training, supplies, staffing) and for institutions providing telehealth support (e.g., devices, internet access, space). Some costs may be offset by federal grants or state reproductive health funding.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 19, 2026 at 8:50 PM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (5)

  • By mandating medication abortion access through student health centers or telehealth, the bill directly reduces travel time and logistical barriers for pregnancy-capable students—especially those from rural areas, low-income backgrounds, or without personal transportation—thereby improving health equity and enabling continuity of education.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 1(2), Sec. 3(1)

  • Requiring private space, devices, and technical support for telehealth appointments ensures that students who cannot travel off-campus (e.g., due to disability, childcare responsibilities, or financial constraints) can still access care discreetly and safely—reducing stigma and improving participation in campus life.

    EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 3(2)(b), Sec. 3(2)(c), Sec. 3(2)(d)

  • Mandating a public health services website with clear reproductive health information and academic accommodation resources improves transparency and empowers students to navigate services independently—supporting informed decision-making and reducing reliance on potentially misleading external sources.

    EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 3(3)(a), Sec. 3(3)(b)(ii)

  • The bill aligns with medical evidence that medication abortion is safe and effective when provided in primary care or student health settings—expanding access in this setting may reduce complications from unsafe or delayed care and improve long-term health outcomes for young adults.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(4), Sec. 3(1)

  • By reducing the need for students to travel long distances (up to 78 miles or 4+ hours) to access abortion care, the bill helps prevent displacement from campus housing or eviction due to extended absences—particularly important for students in short-term leases or unstable housing situations.

    HousingPeopleRef: Sec. 1(3), Sec. 3(1)
Potential Concerns (5)

  • The bill mandates medication abortion access by 2026–27, but does not require states or providers to ensure availability of the drugs themselves—federal restrictions (e.g., REMS program) and supply chain constraints may limit actual implementation, potentially creating a gap between legal mandate and real-world access.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)

  • Institutions without student health centers must provide private space, devices, and technical support for telehealth appointments—this imposes new infrastructure and staffing costs on smaller colleges (e.g., community colleges, regional campuses), which may strain already tight budgets and divert resources from core academic functions.

    Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 3(2)(c)-(d)

  • While the bill mandates access, it does not require state funding to cover the cost of the medication or associated clinical services—students may still face out-of-pocket costs for the pills (which can exceed $800 without insurance), limiting access for low-income students despite improved logistical access.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)

  • The requirement to provide at least two referrals—including telehealth—places administrative burden on campus staff (e.g., health center directors, student affairs officers) to coordinate with external providers, but does not create new legal liability or enforcement mechanisms.

    Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 3(2)(a)(ii)

  • The requirement to link to academic accommodation resources may increase administrative overhead for student services offices, but the bill does not allocate new funding for training staff or updating accommodation policies—potentially leading to inconsistent implementation across institutions.

    EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 3(3)(b)(ii)

Who Is Most Affected

Low-income and first-generation students at public institutionsPositive Impact

Low-income and first-generation students—especially those from rural areas—stand to benefit significantly: reduced travel time and logistical barriers improve access to time-sensitive care and reduce risk of academic disruption. However, those without insurance may still face out-of-pocket costs for the medication itself.

Community and regional public collegesMixed Impact

Community and regional colleges (e.g., WA community colleges, WSU branches) without existing health centers will face new administrative and infrastructure costs to meet referral and telehealth requirements—though they serve a higher proportion of students who need these services most.

Students with disabilities or housing instabilityPositive Impact

Students with disabilities, caregivers, or those experiencing housing instability benefit from on-campus telehealth access and privacy protections—but may face barriers if institutions lack ADA-compliant telehealth spaces or sufficient tech support.

Rural studentsPositive Impact

Rural students gain substantial access improvements, as the bill directly addresses the 78-mile travel barrier and long wait times—but success depends on whether telehealth providers can actually serve them (e.g., broadband access, provider licensing).

Campus health center staffMixed Impact

Campus health center staff (nurses, physicians, counselors) may see increased demand and need for training, but the bill does not mandate additional staffing or compensation—potentially increasing burnout without added support.