Hyde Amendment

Named after the original congressional sponsor, Rep. Henry Hyde, the Hyde Amendment is a clause that is added to annual appropriation bills for the Department of Labor, the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services (and other related agencies). The clause prevents any funds designated for those agencies from being spent on health coverage that includes elective abortions. The amendment was first introduced in 1976 for the 1977 appropriations bill as a federal response to Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).

Congress has included two exceptions to the general prohibition: “if the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest; or in the case where a woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself, that would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed.” See e.g.: H.R. 7148 § 507.

One of the primary effects of the Hyde Amendment is that federally funded programs such as Medicaid and Medicare will not contribute to abortions. Due to its federal-state cooperative nature, some states will fund medicaid contributions for abortions.

The Hyde Amendment has been codified to apply to relevant agencies such as the Department of Health and Human Services and Medicaid. See: 45 C.F.R. § 86.18 and 42 C.F.R. § 441.200 respectively. However, the Hyde Amendment is not a permanent law; it must be renewed annually as a part of the appropriations bill to remain valid.

The Hyde Amendment has faced legal challenges since its first inclusion in a congressional appropriations bill in 1977. Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. 297 (1980) upheld the Hyde Amendment despite challenges that it violated the Fifth and First Amendments. The Court ruled that the provision did not violate the Fifth Amendment because “[the Hyde Amendment] places no governmental obstacle in the path of a woman who chooses to terminate her pregnancy, but rather, by means of unequal subsidization of abortion and other medical services, encourages alternative activity deemed in the public interest.” Additionally, the Court found that the Hyde Amendment did not violate the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause merely because it overlapped with existing religious doctrine.

Those opposed to the Hyde Amendment have argued that since lower-income people and marginalized communities are more reliant on governmental insurance and public assistance, they are more greatly affected by the provisions' denial of care. As a result, those people who already face systemic challenges face additional barriers to receiving care as a result of the amendment.

[Last reviewed in April of 2026 by the Wex Definitions Team]

Wex