Experts Warn of Tens of Thousands of Potential New HIV Cases and Billions in Health Care Costs if No-Cost Access to PrEP is Discontinued
Lambda Legal, GLAD Law and Mintz, alongside leading HIV, LGBTQ+, and healthcare organizations, have submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in Kennedy v. Braidwood Management, Inc., urging the Court to uphold no-cost access to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and other critical preventive healthcare services. The brief highlights the devastating public health consequences of undermining access to PrEP, a medication that reduces the risk of HIV transmission by 99% when taken as prescribed.
“The lower court ruling in Braidwood is rooted in stigma and bigotry towards the LGBTQ+ community and people vulnerable to HIV,” said Dr. Stephen Lee, NASTAD Executive Director. “It will cause incalculable harm to our efforts to end the HIV epidemic. We are pleased to file an amicus brief to help offer insight into why this decision is so detrimental to our HIV/AIDS public health system.”
“For decades, bipartisan public health efforts have helped turn the tide on the HIV epidemic. This case threatens to unravel that progress by making PrEP unaffordable for many of the communities most at risk,” said Jose Abrigo, Lambda Legal HIV Project Director. “No-cost access to PrEP is not only a medical necessity, it is a moral and legal imperative in the fight to end HIV. If we want to achieve the goal of eradicating HIV we should be expanding access to this medication, not limiting it.”
The brief, submitted on behalf of the National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors and a coalition of HIV and healthcare advocates, details the indisputable medical evidence supporting PrEP and the catastrophic consequences of restricting access. Since its FDA approval in 2012, PrEP has been a game-changer in HIV prevention, particularly for Black and Latine communities as well as youth, which continue to face disproportionate rates of new infections.
“Copays and deductibles deter people from accessing healthcare,” said Ben Klein, Senior Director of Litigation and HIV Law at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law). “PrEP is nearly 100% effective at preventing transmission of HIV but it is already underutilized, particularly among Black and Latino communities. As the brief filed today by NASTAD and other HIV experts demonstrates, allowing the lower court’s ruling in Braidwood to stand will exacerbate racial health disparities, increase new HIV diagnoses by the tens of thousands, and have devastating consequences on our efforts to end the epidemic.”
At its core, this case is about more than just PrEP, it is a direct attack on the foundation of preventive healthcare in the United States and a key pillar of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The preventive services mandate ensures that millions of Americans have access to critical screenings, vaccines, and treatments without financial barriers, dramatically improving public health outcomes. From HIV prevention to cancer screenings, from childhood immunizations to maternal health care, these services save lives, reduce long-term healthcare costs, and prevent the spread of disease. This case is a referendum on whether the United States will continue investing in evidence-based, cost-effective public health strategies.
Lambda Legal, GLAD Law and Mintz remain steadfast in their commitment to advocating for the rights of LGBTQ+ people and individuals living with or at risk of HIV. The organizations urge the Court to recognize the critical role of preventive healthcare in protecting public health and to reject efforts that seek to dismantle these life-saving protections.