A contentious public hearing on House Bill 1677 drew wide participation on Feb. 18 as students, reproductive-rights advocates and faith-based opponents presented sharply different views about whether public campuses should provide access to medication abortion or referrals.

Nut graf: The bill would require public institutions that operate student health centers to provide access to medication abortion through campus providers, public referral programs or other delivery methods; campuses without health centers would have to provide referrals and private space and technical support for telehealth. Proponents emphasized student access and equity; opponents said abortion is not health care and raised safety and moral objections.

Students and campus advocates delivered emotional testimonies in favor. Three students from Lake Washington High School said access at campus health centers would prevent students from missing coursework and from traveling long distances for care; they also warned of misinformation from crisis-pregnancy centers. Campus advocates and national organizations, including Advocates for Youth, described medication abortion as safe, time‑sensitive and critical for students who are low-income or who live far from providers. Advocates said medication abortion differs from emergency contraception and that campus services should include clear referral information and accommodations for students using telehealth.

Opponents included representatives of the Washington State Catholic Conference and Conservative Ladies of Washington, who argued abortion is not a right or health care and raised concerns about telehealth distribution of medication and its safety. A retired attorney told the committee that clinic websites and some providers already offer prompt appointments, arguing the bill addresses a “nonexistent problem.”

Committee staff briefed members on the bill’s text: medication abortion generally refers to a two‑drug oral regimen (mifepristone and misoprostol) used early in pregnancy; the bill requires updated campus health webpages, referral contacts, and accommodations for telehealth where student health centers do not exist.

Ending: The committee closed testimony and staff said a proposed substitute would be posted; staff and the chair noted amendment deadlines and that a related Senate bill (SB 5321) exists for reference. The Feb. 18 transcript records no committee vote.