--- title: "Maryland — abortion law" description: "Maryland has some of the strongest abortion protections in the country. A voter-approved constitutional amendment effective in January 2025 guarantees every person the fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including decisions to prevent, continue, or end a pregnancy. The state may not…" type: "legislation" jurisdiction: "Maryland" as_of_date: "2026-07-12" source_url: "https://www.abhortion.org/legislation/md.html" --- # Maryland — abortion law _Maryland · United States_ ## Overview **Protected by constitution; no gestational limit** Maryland protects abortion through both statute (since 1992) and a constitutional amendment (effective 2025), with no gestational cut-off; post-viability abortion is permitted for life, health, or fetal anomaly. Maryland has some of the strongest abortion protections in the country. A voter-approved constitutional amendment effective in January 2025 guarantees every person the fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including decisions to prevent, continue, or end a pregnancy. The state may not interfere with that right unless it has a compelling reason and uses the least restrictive means. By statute dating to 1992, the state cannot interfere with a woman's decision to terminate a pregnancy before the fetus is viable (able to survive outside the womb), and even after viability the state cannot interfere if the procedure is needed to protect the woman's life or health or if the fetus has a genetic defect or serious deformity. There is no waiting period, no mandatory ultrasound, and abortion providers may be physicians, nurse practitioners, nurse-midwives, or physician assistants. Maryland also has shield laws that protect providers and patients from out-of-state investigations and prosecutions. Private insurance and Medicaid both cover abortion without cost-sharing. > "That every person, as a central component of an individual's rights to liberty and equality, has the fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including but not limited to the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue, or end one's own pregnancy. The State may not, directly or indirectly, deny, burden, or abridge the right unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means." > — Md. Const., Declaration of Rights, Art. 48 **Legal analysis** Maryland's abortion regime rests on twin protections: (1) Md. Code, Health-General § 20-209, enacted by SB 162 (1991), approved by voter referendum in 1992, which provides that 'the State may not interfere with the decision of a woman to terminate a pregnancy' before viability, or at any time if the procedure is necessary to protect life or health or if the fetus has a genetic defect or serious deformity or abnormality; and (2) Maryland Constitution, Declaration of Rights, Article 48, effective January 17, 2025, which provides that 'every person, as a central component of an individual's rights to liberty and equality, has the fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including but not limited to the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue, or end one's own pregnancy' and that the State may only abridge this right if 'justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.' The statutory scheme was never enjoined; the constitutional provision goes further than the statute by providing a strict-scrutiny standard for any interference. The Abortion Care Access Act (HB 937, 2022) expanded provider categories and mandated insurance and Medicaid coverage. Maryland is a 'shield state,' with laws blocking cooperation with out-of-state abortion investigations. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Const., Declaration of Rights, Art. 48, Article 48, [Maryland General Assembly / Westlaw](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N064507504C1711EEACD6F0BA0BFB33CA?viewType=FullText) · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209, subsection (b), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false)* ## At a glance Every machine-readable determination in the research document. Each value is derived from a sourced finding below. | Field | Value | | --- | --- | | Legal classification | Protected by constitution | | Gestational limit weeks | — | | Limit measured from | — | | Abortion currently available | Yes | | Ban or limit enjoined | No | | Mother expressly exempt | Yes | | Mother prosecutable in practice | No | | Self managed abortion criminalized | No | | Abortion charged as homicide | No | | Fetal homicide law | Yes | | Fetal wrongful death action | Yes | | Personhood language in law | No | | Personhood contradiction | No | | Medication abortion distinct status | No | | Mailing pills banned | No | | Method bans | None | | Telehealth prescribing allowed | Yes | | Physician only law | No | | Provider max penalty | — | | Helpers criminally exposed | No | | Travel assistance criminalized | No | | Civil bounty law | No | | Shield state | Yes | | Waiting period hours | 0 | | State scripted counseling | No | | Ultrasound required | None | | In person visits required | 0 | | Parental involvement | Notification only | | Judicial bypass available | Yes | | Spousal consent or notice on books | No | | Medicaid coverage | Broader than hyde | | Private insurance restricted | No | | State funding posture | Funds providers | | Rape incest exception | Not applicable | | Exceptions present | Life, Physical health, Mental health, Fatal fetal anomaly | | Major pending change | Yes | ## Definitions **No statutory definition of 'abortion'** Maryland law does not contain a standalone statutory definition of 'abortion'; the operative provisions instead describe the act as 'termination of a pregnancy.' Maryland's abortion laws do not contain a single catch-all legal definition of 'abortion.' Instead, the key statute — which protects the right to terminate a pregnancy — simply describes the act as 'the decision of a woman to terminate a pregnancy.' Surgical abortion facilities are regulated under a separate COMAR chapter (10.12.01) that defines 'surgical abortion facility' as an outpatient facility providing 'surgical termination of pregnancy' as a regular service. Because there is no restrictive statutory definition, miscarriage management, ectopic pregnancy treatment, and other pregnancy-ending interventions are not caught in an abortion definitional net. The constitutional amendment (Art. 48) uses broader language: the 'ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue, or end one's own pregnancy.' IVF and embryos outside the womb are not addressed in the abortion provisions. > "The State may not interfere with the decision of a woman to terminate a pregnancy..." > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b) **Legal analysis** There is no statutory section in Maryland's Health-General Article Title 20 Subtitle 2 that defines 'abortion' as a standalone term. The operative protections in § 20-209 refer to 'the decision of a woman to terminate a pregnancy.' COMAR 10.12.01.01 provides a limited regulatory definition: a 'surgical abortion facility' is 'an outpatient facility that provides surgical termination of pregnancy as a regular service except if the facility is regulated by the Department' under other provisions. The Constitutional provision in Art. 48 uses 'end one's own pregnancy' as its operative phrase. Because Maryland's laws are protective rather than prohibitory, the absence of a restrictive definition avoids the pitfalls seen in ban states where medical management of miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy can be swept under the abortion statute. No language defines embryos or IVF embryos as within the abortion framework. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b), subsection (b), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false) · COMAR 10.12.01.01(6), subsection (6), [Cornell Legal Information Institute](https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/maryland/COMAR-10-12-01-01)* **Editor's note.** Maryland's lack of a restrictive statutory definition of 'abortion' is itself a significant legal fact — it reflects the protective rather than prohibitory orientation of the statutory scheme. ## Current status **Legal at all stages; constitutional protection** Abortion is legal in Maryland at all stages of pregnancy without a gestational cut-off, protected by both statute and the state constitution. Abortion is legally accessible in Maryland at any point in pregnancy. Before the fetus reaches viability (the point at which it could survive outside the womb, as determined by the provider's clinical judgment), the state may not interfere with the decision to terminate a pregnancy. After viability, abortion remains legal if the procedure is necessary to protect the woman's life or health, or if the fetus has a genetic defect or serious deformity. The constitutional amendment passed in November 2024 and effective January 2025 adds an additional layer of protection: the state must show a compelling interest and use the least restrictive means to interfere with any reproductive decision. There is no waiting period, no mandatory ultrasound, and no mandatory counseling session required by law. Providers who are licensed and authorized — including physicians, nurse practitioners, nurse-midwives, and physician assistants — may perform abortions. > "The State may not interfere with the decision of a woman to terminate a pregnancy: (1) Before the fetus is viable; or (2) At any time during the woman's pregnancy, if: (i) The termination procedure is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman; or (ii) The fetus is affected by genetic defect or serious deformity or abnormality." > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b) **Legal analysis** Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b) prohibits state interference with a woman's decision to terminate a pregnancy before viability, and after viability where the procedure is necessary to protect life or health or where a fetal genetic defect or serious abnormality exists. Viability is defined in § 20-209(a) as 'that stage when, in the best clinical judgment of the qualified provider based on the particular facts of the case before the qualified provider, there is a reasonable likelihood of the fetus's sustained survival outside the womb.' The 2024 constitutional amendment, Md. Const., Decl. of Rights, Art. 48, adds strict scrutiny for any state action that would 'deny, burden, or abridge' the fundamental right to reproductive freedom, which expressly includes the ability to 'end one's own pregnancy.' Together, the statute and the constitutional amendment create a dual-layered protective regime. The statutory protection was originally enacted in 1991 and approved by voter referendum in 1992. The statutory provision was never dependent on Roe v. Wade and remained fully operative after Dobbs. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b), subsection (b), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false) · Md. Const., Declaration of Rights, Art. 48, Article 48, [Westlaw](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N064507504C1711EEACD6F0BA0BFB33CA?viewType=FullText)* ## Law-in-effect vs. law-on-the-books **Fully enforceable; no injunctions** Maryland's abortion-protective statutory and constitutional provisions are in full effect with no injunctions or stays against them. Maryland's abortion laws are not tied up in court. The state's protective laws — the 1992 statutory protection and the 2025 constitutional amendment — are not challenged by any current injunction. There is no pre-Roe zombie ban to reactivate, because Maryland repealed its pre-1973 abortion restrictions when it enacted the protective statute in 1991. While some bills seeking to restrict abortion (such as a 'heartbeat bill') have been introduced in recent legislative sessions, none have passed or appear likely to pass in the near future. The shield laws that protect providers and patients from out-of-state enforcement actions are also fully in force. **Legal analysis** Maryland's abortion-protective legal regime faces no active injunctions. The statutory framework (Health-Gen. § 20-209) has been continuously operative since 1992. The constitutional amendment (Art. 48) became effective January 17, 2025. Anti-abortion bills have been introduced in the 2026 legislative session (e.g., HB 49, a 'heartbeat bill'), but given the strong Democratic majorities in the General Assembly and the now-constitutionalized right, they face near-certain defeat. The state's shield laws (SB 859 of 2023, SB 119 of 2024) are also unchallenged and fully enforceable. Maryland's pre-Roe abortion ban was effectively superseded by the 1991 legislation and the subsequent 1992 voter referendum that upheld it; no pre-Roe statute lurks to be revived. There is no prosecutorial non-enforcement issue because the law is not prohibitory. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Const., Declaration of Rights, Art. 48, Credits note, [Westlaw](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N064507504C1711EEACD6F0BA0BFB33CA?viewType=FullText) · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209, subsection (b), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false)* ## Exceptions ### Life of the mother **Life exception post-viability** Abortion is permitted at any time in pregnancy when necessary to protect the woman's life. Maryland law allows abortion at any stage of pregnancy — even after the point of viability — when the procedure is necessary to protect the woman's life. This is determined by the qualified provider's clinical judgment, made in good faith and consistent with accepted standards of clinical practice. The provider is not liable for civil damages or subject to criminal penalty for a decision made in good faith. > "The State may not interfere with the decision of a woman to terminate a pregnancy... At any time during the woman's pregnancy, if: (i) The termination procedure is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman..." > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b)(2)(i), (d) **Legal analysis** Health-Gen. § 20-209(b)(2)(i) provides that the State may not interfere with the decision to terminate a pregnancy at any time if '[t]he termination procedure is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman.' § 20-209(d) immunizes the provider: 'The qualified provider is not liable for civil damages or subject to a criminal penalty for a decision to perform an abortion under this section made in good faith and in the qualified provider's best clinical judgment in accordance with accepted standards of clinical practice.' The 2026 enactment of a state-level EMTALA (HB 750, signed June 2026) further codifies emergency abortion protections. No additional certification, documentation, or reporting requirements beyond standard medical records apply to the life exception. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b)(2)(i), (d), subsections (b)(2)(i), (d), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false)* ### Physical health **Health exception post-viability** Abortion is permitted after viability when necessary to protect the woman's health, broadly stated without limitation to physical health. Maryland law protects abortion at any point in pregnancy — even after viability — to protect the woman's health. The statute uses 'health' without limiting it to physical health, so it is understood to include mental health as well. The determination is made by the provider in their best clinical judgment. > "The termination procedure is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman" > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b)(2)(i) **Legal analysis** Health-Gen. § 20-209(b)(2)(i) uses the unmodified term 'health' — not 'physical health' or 'life-threatening physical condition.' This is broader than the typical Hyde Amendment formulation and covers mental health as well as physical health. The provider has immunity for good-faith clinical judgments under § 20-209(d). No separate certification or documentation is required beyond standard medical records. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b)(2)(i), subsection (b)(2)(i), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false)* ### Mental health **Mental health covered under health exception** The post-viability 'health' exception is not limited to physical health and thus encompasses mental health. Maryland's post-viability exception uses the word 'health' without any qualifier like 'physical' or 'serious.' This means that threats to the woman's mental health are included in the post-viability permission. The provider has discretion to determine when the health exception applies. > "necessary to protect the life or health of the woman" > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b)(2)(i) **Legal analysis** The term 'health' in § 20-209(b)(2)(i) is not defined or limited in the statute. Under standard principles of statutory construction, and consistent with Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973), 'health' encompasses 'all factors — physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age — relevant to the well-being of the patient.' Maryland courts have not narrowed this construction. The provider's good-faith clinical judgment controls. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b)(2)(i), subsection (b)(2)(i), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false)* **Editor's note.** The word 'health' is unqualified in the statute; whether a Maryland court might one day construe it to exclude mental health is theoretically possible but inconsistent with prevailing interpretive norms. ### Fatal fetal anomaly **Fetal anomaly post-viability** Abortion is permitted after viability when the fetus is affected by genetic defect or serious deformity or abnormality. Even after the fetus reaches viability, Maryland law allows abortion when the fetus has a genetic defect or a serious deformity or abnormality. There is no requirement that the condition be lethal — it need only be 'serious.' The determination is made by the provider in their clinical judgment. > "The fetus is affected by genetic defect or serious deformity or abnormality." > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b)(2)(ii) **Legal analysis** Health-Gen. § 20-209(b)(2)(ii) allows post-viability abortion where '[t]he fetus is affected by genetic defect or serious deformity or abnormality.' This is not limited to 'fatal' anomalies and is notably broader than exceptions in other states. The phrase 'genetic defect or serious deformity or abnormality' encompasses both chromosomal/genetic conditions (such as Trisomy 18) and structural abnormalities discovered through ultrasound. No statutory threshold of severity beyond 'serious.' Provider has immunity for good-faith decisions under § 20-209(d). *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b)(2)(ii), subsection (b)(2)(ii), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false)* ### Ectopic pregnancy & miscarriage care **Not needed; protective regime** Because Maryland has no general abortion ban, no specific carve-out for ectopic pregnancy or miscarriage management is necessary; these procedures are not restricted. Maryland does not restrict abortion before viability at all, so treatment for ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage management are not in legal jeopardy. Providers can manage these conditions according to accepted standards of clinical practice without fear of prosecution under an abortion-specific statute. The fetal homicide law also expressly exempts acts of the pregnant woman regarding her own fetus and lawful medical care. > "Nothing in this section applies to an act or failure to act of a pregnant woman with regard to her own fetus." > — Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 2-103(f) **Legal analysis** Because Health-Gen. § 20-209 is a protective rather than prohibitory statute, no statutory carve-out is required for ectopic pregnancy or miscarriage. The Criminal Law fetal homicide statute (§ 2-103(f)) further provides that '[n]othing in this section applies to an act or failure to act of a pregnant woman with regard to her own fetus' and § 2-103(e) exempts physicians and licensed medical professionals for fetal death 'in the course of administering lawful medical care.' These provisions ensure that neither a pregnant woman nor a provider faces criminal exposure under the fetal-homicide statute for pregnancy loss or termination. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 2-103(f), subsection (f), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcr§ion=2-103&enactments=false)* ### Rape **Not applicable; no pre-viability restriction** A rape exception is structurally unnecessary in Maryland because abortion is fully protected before viability without exception requirements. Because Maryland law protects abortion before viability without restriction, a person who becomes pregnant as a result of rape can obtain an abortion under the same rules as anyone else. No special documentation of the assault, no police report, and no additional certifications are required. **Legal analysis** Rape and incest exceptions are relevant only in states that restrict or ban abortion before viability. Because Health-Gen. § 20-209 protects all pre-viability abortions without restriction, and the post-viability regime already contains broad exceptions (life, health, fetal anomaly), there is no legal need for separate rape or incest exceptions. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b), subsection (b)(1), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false)* ### Incest **Not applicable; no pre-viability restriction** An incest exception is structurally unnecessary in Maryland because abortion is fully protected before viability without exception requirements. Because Maryland law protects abortion before viability without restriction, a person who becomes pregnant as a result of incest can obtain an abortion under the same rules as anyone else. No reporting of the incest to authorities is required. **Legal analysis** As with rape, the incest exception is moot because of the protective statutory scheme. No additional requirements attach. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(b), subsection (b)(1), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false)* ## Methods ### Procedural surgical **Legal; no state method ban** Procedural (surgical) abortion is legal in Maryland before and after viability under the same statutory framework, with no state-level method-specific ban. Surgical abortion procedures are legal in Maryland at all stages of pregnancy, subject only to the pre-viability/post-viability framework described above. Maryland has not enacted any state-level ban on specific surgical abortion methods, such as dilation and evacuation (D&E). The federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 (18 U.S.C. § 1531) applies nationwide, but it targets a specific rare procedure (intact dilation and extraction) and includes a life exception. Surgical abortion facilities must be licensed under COMAR 10.12.01, which sets standards for administration, personnel, anesthesia, emergency services, and physical environment. > "Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both." > — 18 U.S.C. § 1531(a) **Legal analysis** Maryland has no state-law ban on dilation and evacuation (D&E) or any other specific abortion method. The federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, 18 U.S.C. § 1531, upheld in Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (2007), applies in Maryland as in all states, prohibiting 'knowingly perform[ing] a partial-birth abortion' except where necessary to save the life of the mother. The federal Act does not contain a health exception. Surgical abortion facilities in Maryland are regulated by COMAR 10.12.01, adopted in 2012 under authority of Health-Gen. § 20-209(c). These regulations require licensure and establish standards for care but do not impose medically unnecessary structural requirements characteristic of TRAP laws in restrictive states. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · 18 U.S.C. § 1531(a), subsection (a), [U.S. House of Representatives, Office of the Law Revision Counsel](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=%28title%3A18+section%3A1531+edition%3Aprelim%29) · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209, subsection (b), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false)* **Editor's note.** The federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act is the only method-specific restriction applicable in Maryland. It applies nationwide regardless of state law. ### Medication **Legal; telehealth permitted** Medication abortion using mifepristone and misoprostol is legal in Maryland, available via telehealth, and not subject to any state-specific mailing ban or in-person dispensing requirement. Medication abortion — using mifepristone and misoprostol — is legal and available in Maryland. People can obtain a prescription through telehealth (video or phone appointment) and receive the pills by mail. There is no Maryland law requiring an in-person visit to receive medication abortion pills. Following the 2023 federal court challenge to mifepristone's FDA approval, Governor Moore announced a partnership to purchase a substantial stockpile of mifepristone to ensure continued access in the state. As of mid-2026, a federal appellate decision from Louisiana restricting telehealth prescribing of mifepristone has been stayed by the U.S. Supreme Court pending further review, so telehealth access continues nationwide including in Maryland. > "beginning December 1, 2023, a health information exchange or electronic health network may not disclose Mifepristone data or the diagnosis, procedure, medication, or related codes for abortion care" > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 4-302.5 **Legal analysis** Maryland imposes no state-specific restrictions on medication abortion beyond the generally applicable provider-qualification framework (Health-Gen. § 20-207, § 20-208). There is no law requiring the provider to be a physician for medication abortion specifically; the 'qualified provider' definition encompassing physicians, NPs, nurse-midwives, and PAs applies. There is no in-person dispensing requirement. Telehealth prescribing is not prohibited; indeed, Maryland providers actively offer telehealth abortion services. The state's shield laws (SB 859 of 2023, codified at Md. Code Ann., State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312, Crim. Proc. § 9-106, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 9-302) protect providers who prescribe and dispense medication abortion across state lines. The Governor's mifepristone stockpile initiative secured approximately two-and-a-half years' supply. Maryland's data privacy law (HB 812/SB 786 of 2023, codified at Health-Gen. § 4-302.5) prohibits health information exchanges from disclosing 'mifepristone data.' Federal FDA regulation of mifepristone through the REMS program has been in flux due to litigation, but Maryland state law operates independently to protect access. *Sources — Semi-verified · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 4-302.5, [Westlaw](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N63972D80FA9011EDBE60A179AFFCABB9?viewType=FullText) · Governor Moore Press Release, April 2023, [Office of Governor Wes Moore](https://governor.maryland.gov/news/press-releases/icymi-governor-moore-announced-plan-partnership-university-maryland-medical-system-ensure-access)* **Editor's note.** Federal litigation over mifepristone access through telehealth was live as of July 2026; the Supreme Court has extended a stay preserving the status quo. This field reflects Maryland law, not the federal litigation outcome. Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication. ### Self managed **Not criminalized** Maryland has no law that criminalizes a person for self-managing an abortion, and the fetal-homicide statute expressly exempts a pregnant woman's acts regarding her own fetus. In Maryland, there is no law that makes it a crime for a pregnant person to end their own pregnancy outside the medical system, such as by using pills obtained online or by mail. The state's criminal law on fetal homicide explicitly says that nothing in the section applies to a pregnant woman's own acts or failures to act regarding her own fetus. The state constitution's reproductive freedom amendment provides additional protection. While self-managed abortion is not explicitly authorized, no statute reaches it, and the constitutional and statutory framework would make a prosecution extremely difficult to sustain. > "Nothing in this section applies to an act or failure to act of a pregnant woman with regard to her own fetus." > — Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 2-103(f) **Legal analysis** No Maryland statute criminalizes self-managed abortion. Crim. Law § 2-103(f) expressly states: 'Nothing in this section applies to an act or failure to act of a pregnant woman with regard to her own fetus.' This removes the only plausible criminal vehicle — the fetal homicide statute — from reaching the pregnant woman. The Health-General Article imposes no criminal penalties on the pregnant woman; it is protective, not prohibitory. The constitutional amendment (Art. 48) further constrains any state action that would burden the right to 'end one's own pregnancy.' Maryland's shield laws, while focused on providers and helpers, provide additional protection against out-of-state investigations targeting self-managed abortion. The state's privacy protections (Health-Gen. § 4-302.5) also limit the availability of data that could be used in an investigation. There is no abortion-specific offense in the Maryland Criminal Law Article that could reach self-management. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 2-103(f), subsection (f), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcr§ion=2-103&enactments=false) · Md. Const., Declaration of Rights, Art. 48, Article 48, [Westlaw](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N064507504C1711EEACD6F0BA0BFB33CA?viewType=FullText)* ## Actors ### Who may perform **Qualified provider: not physician-only** Maryland permits physicians, nurse practitioners, nurse-midwives, licensed certified midwives, physician assistants, and other licensed individuals within whose scope abortion falls to perform or prescribe abortions. In Maryland, a range of licensed health care providers — not just physicians — can perform abortions. The law defines a 'qualified provider' as anyone licensed, certified, or otherwise authorized to practice in Maryland for whom performing an abortion is within the scope of their license or certification. This explicitly includes nurse practitioners, nurse-midwives, licensed certified midwives, and physician assistants. The Abortion Care Access Act of 2022 established a training program and fund ($3.5 million annually) to expand the pool of trained providers. There is no requirement that abortions be performed only in hospitals; they may be provided in outpatient clinics. Surgical abortion facilities must be licensed by the state under COMAR 10.12.01. There is no admitting-privileges requirement. > "'Qualified provider' means an individual: (1) Who is licensed, certified, or otherwise authorized by law to practice in the State; and (2) For whom the performance of an abortion is within the scope of the individual's license or certification." > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-207 **Legal analysis** Health-Gen. § 20-207 defines 'qualified provider' as an individual '(1) Who is licensed, certified, or otherwise authorized by law to practice in the State; and (2) For whom the performance of an abortion is within the scope of the individual's license or certification.' Section 20-208 requires that an abortion 'must be performed by a qualified provider.' For parental notification purposes, § 20-103(a) expands the definition to include 'a physician, nurse practitioner, nurse-midwife, licensed certified midwife, physician assistant, or any other individual' meeting the same criteria. This expansion was enacted by the Abortion Care Access Act (HB 937, 2022). The Act also established the Abortion Care Clinical Training Program. Surgical abortion facilities are regulated under COMAR 10.12.01, requiring licensure and compliance with standards for personnel, anesthesia, emergency services, and physical environment. There is no hospital-only requirement and no admitting-privileges rule. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-207, § 20-207, [FindLaw](https://codes.findlaw.com/md/health-general/md-code-health-gen-sect-20-207) · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-208, § 20-208, [Justia](https://law.justia.com/codes/maryland/health-general/title-20/subtitle-2/part-ii/section-20-208)* ### Criminal civil exposure #### Pregnant woman **Exempt; no criminal exposure** The pregnant woman is expressly exempt from criminal liability under the fetal homicide statute and has no exposure under the abortion law, which is protective rather than prohibitory. In Maryland, a pregnant woman who obtains or self-induces an abortion faces no criminal liability. The state's abortion law is a protection of the right to choose, not a prohibition. The fetal homicide statute says plainly that none of its provisions apply to a pregnant woman's acts regarding her own fetus. The constitutional amendment reinforces this by protecting the right to 'end one's own pregnancy.' There is no scenario under current Maryland law in which a woman could be prosecuted for obtaining or self-managing an abortion. > "Nothing in this section applies to an act or failure to act of a pregnant woman with regard to her own fetus." > — Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 2-103(f) **Legal analysis** Health-Gen. § 20-209 is a protective statute; it imposes no criminal penalties. Crim. Law § 2-103(f) provides an express exemption: 'Nothing in this section applies to an act or failure to act of a pregnant woman with regard to her own fetus.' This is an unambiguous carve-out from the state's fetal homicide statute. The Health-General Article contains no provision penalizing the pregnant woman. The constitutional amendment in Art. 48 further shields the decision to 'end one's own pregnancy.' Even a broader reading of the drug-distribution or other general statutes would face substantial constitutional barriers under Article 48's strict-scrutiny standard. The Maryland Court of Appeals decision in Akers v. State (2025) held that a woman's internet searches about terminating a pregnancy were 'irrelevant as a matter of law to show her intent to kill or harm a newborn many months later at birth,' reinforcing that abortion-related conduct is viewed as legally protected. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 2-103(f), subsection (f), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcr§ion=2-103&enactments=false) · Moira E. Akers v. State of Maryland, No. 7, September Term 2024 (Md. 2025), slip op. at 1, [Maryland Courts](https://www.courts.state.md.us/data/opinions/coa/2025/7a24.pdf)* #### Physician **No penalty; good-faith immunity** A provider who performs an abortion in good faith and in accordance with accepted standards of clinical practice is not liable for civil damages or subject to criminal penalty. Under Maryland law, physicians and other qualified providers who perform abortions within the legal framework are protected from both civil liability and criminal penalties. The statute says a qualified provider 'is not liable for civil damages or subject to a criminal penalty for a decision to perform an abortion under this section made in good faith and in the qualified provider's best clinical judgment in accordance with accepted standards of clinical practice.' Performing an abortion outside these parameters — without license or in bad faith — could expose the provider to professional discipline and potentially to general criminal laws such as assault or unauthorized practice of medicine, but there is no abortion-specific criminal penalty. > "The qualified provider is not liable for civil damages or subject to a criminal penalty for a decision to perform an abortion under this section made in good faith and in the qualified provider's best clinical judgment in accordance with accepted standards of clinical practice." > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(d) **Legal analysis** Health-Gen. § 20-209(d) provides: 'The qualified provider is not liable for civil damages or subject to a criminal penalty for a decision to perform an abortion under this section made in good faith and in the qualified provider's best clinical judgment in accordance with accepted standards of clinical practice.' This is an immunity provision, not merely a defense. Because Maryland's abortion law is protective rather than prohibitory, there is no abortion-specific criminal offense for providers to violate. A provider who performs an abortion outside the § 20-209 framework could face prosecution under general criminal statutes and professional discipline via the relevant health occupations board. However, the shield law (Health Occ. § 1-227) prevents a Maryland board from disciplining a practitioner for providing 'legally protected health care' lawful in Maryland, even if the practitioner is disciplined in another state for the same conduct. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209(d), subsection (d), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false)* #### Prescriber pharmacist **No abortion-specific exposure** Non-physician prescribers (NPs, PAs, nurse-midwives) and pharmacists operate under the same protective framework as physicians, with no abortion-specific criminal exposure. Nurse practitioners, physician assistants, nurse-midwives, and pharmacists involved in abortion care in Maryland face no special criminal or civil exposure. These providers are included in the 'qualified provider' definition and benefit from the same good-faith immunity provision as physicians. Pharmacists who dispense mifepristone or misoprostol pursuant to valid prescriptions are acting within their scope of practice and are protected by both the abortion provisions and the general framework governing pharmacy practice. The shield laws protect against out-of-state actions targeting these providers. > "'Qualified provider' means a physician, nurse practitioner, nurse-midwife, licensed certified midwife, physician assistant, or any other individual: (1) Who is licensed, certified, or otherwise authorized by law to practice in the State; and (2) For whom the performance of an abortion is within the scope of the individual's license or certification." > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-103(a) **Legal analysis** Health-Gen. § 20-207 includes NPs, PAs, and nurse-midwives within the 'qualified provider' definition, and § 20-209(d) extends good-faith immunity to all qualified providers. For pharmacists, dispensing abortion medication is within the ordinary scope of pharmacy practice and is not separately addressed in the abortion statutes. The shield law (SB 859 of 2023) protects all 'health care practitioners' — a broadly defined term — from adverse licensing actions for providing legally protected health care. Out-of-state prescriptions presented to Maryland pharmacists would be filled under ordinary pharmacy law; the pharmacist is not expected to investigate the legality of the prescription in the prescribing state. Maryland's shield law at Crim. Proc. § 9-106 protects against extradition for providing or aiding in legally protected health care. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-103(a), subsection (a), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-103&enactments=False&archived=False)* #### Nurses and staff **No abortion-specific exposure** Nurses, clinic staff, and other assistants involved in abortion care face no abortion-specific criminal or civil liability as long as they act within their professional scope. Nurses and clinic staff who assist with abortion procedures or medication abortion care in Maryland are not subject to abortion-specific criminal or civil liability. Maryland's abortion law is protective, not prohibitory, so there is no accomplice-liability concern tied to an underlying abortion crime. Conscience protections in § 20-214 allow staff to refuse to participate without penalty, but for those who do participate, the general medical malpractice and professional discipline frameworks apply, not abortion-specific liability. > "A person may not be required to perform or participate in, or refer to any source for, any medical procedure that results in artificial insemination, sterilization, or termination of pregnancy... The refusal of a person to perform or participate in, or refer to a source for, these medical procedures may not be a basis for... disciplinary or other recriminatory action against the person." > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-214(a) **Legal analysis** Because Maryland imposes no criminal penalty for abortion itself, the law of accomplice liability has no abortion-specific application. Staff face the same civil liability (medical malpractice) as in any other medical procedure. The shield law at Md. Code Ann., Health Occ. § 1-227 protects Maryland-licensed health care practitioners from discipline for providing legally protected health care lawful in Maryland. The conscience clause at Health-Gen. § 20-214 protects those who refuse to participate from adverse action. *Sources — Semi-verified · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-214(a), subsection (a)(1), (a)(2), [FindLaw](https://codes.findlaw.com/md/health-general/md-code-health-gen-sect-20-214)* **Editor's note.** Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication. #### Other helpers **No criminal exposure for helpers** Friends, family members, employers, and others who assist someone in obtaining an abortion face no criminal or civil exposure under Maryland law, which does not criminalize abortion assistance. Maryland law does not make it a crime to help someone get an abortion. A friend who drives, a parent who pays, an employer who reimburses travel, or an abortion fund that covers costs — none face criminal or civil liability under state law for assisting someone with abortion access. The shield laws specifically protect those who 'aid' in legally protected health care from out-of-state investigation and extradition. Because there is no underlying abortion crime, there is no basis for accomplice or conspiracy liability. > "The Governor may not surrender a person to another state if the alleged act involves providing, procuring, or aiding in legally protected health care" > — Md. Code Ann., Crim. Proc. § 9-106 **Legal analysis** Maryland has no statute criminalizing aiding or abetting an abortion. The shield law at Md. Code Ann., Crim. Proc. § 9-106 provides that the Governor 'may not surrender a person to another state if the alleged act involves providing, procuring, or aiding in legally protected health care' and the act would not be a crime in Maryland. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 9-302 prohibits judges from ordering testimony or document production for out-of-state proceedings involving legally protected health care. Md. Code Ann., State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312 prohibits state agencies and employees from providing information or expending resources 'in furtherance of an interstate investigation or proceeding' related to legally protected health care. These provisions protect not only providers but also those who assist — a category that reaches abortion funds, practical-support organizations, employers, family, and friends. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Crim. Proc. § 9-106, p. 1, [Williams Institute / UCLA Law (fact sheet summarizing statute)](https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Shield-Law-MD-Jul-2025.pdf)* **Editor's note.** The shield law provisions were verified through the Williams Institute fact sheet, which cites the specific code sections. Direct statutory text should be re-confirmed on the Maryland General Assembly website for the final publication. ## Aiding & assisting ### Travel assistance **Protected; not criminalized** Helping someone travel for an abortion — whether within Maryland or out of state — is not criminalized, and the state's shield laws extend protection against out-of-state enforcement. Maryland does not have any 'abortion trafficking' law or other statute that makes it a crime to help someone travel to obtain an abortion, whether within the state or out of state. The shield laws specifically protect people who aid others in accessing legally protected health care from extradition, subpoenas, and other out-of-state enforcement actions. Someone who drives a friend to an appointment, buys a plane ticket, or coordinates travel logistics faces no legal risk under Maryland law — and the state will actively resist out-of-state efforts to penalize such assistance. > "The Governor may not surrender a person to another state if the alleged act involves providing, procuring, or aiding in 'legally protected health care' and the act would not be a crime in Maryland." > — Md. Code Ann., Crim. Proc. § 9-106 **Legal analysis** No Maryland statute criminalizes travel for abortion — the concept of 'abortion trafficking' laws seen in states like Idaho and Tennessee has no analogue in Maryland law. The shield law at Crim. Proc. § 9-106 bars extradition for 'providing, procuring, or aiding in legally protected health care.' Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 9-302 bars judges from issuing subpoenas or compelling testimony for out-of-state proceedings involving legally protected health care. The First Amendment implications of restricting travel information are not contested in Maryland, since no such restriction exists. Under the constitutional amendment (Art. 48), any attempt to restrict travel assistance would face strict scrutiny. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Crim. Proc. § 9-106, p. 1, [Williams Institute / UCLA Law](https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Shield-Law-MD-Jul-2025.pdf)* ### Funding **Not criminalized; state funds access** Funding an abortion — whether individually, through an employer benefit, or through an abortion fund — is not criminalized in Maryland, and the state has created a public grant program to fund abortion access. Maryland does not criminalize paying for someone's abortion or for their travel to obtain one. Abortion funds and other organizations that provide financial assistance operate legally. Employers may include abortion coverage and travel reimbursement in their health plans. In 2025, Maryland created the Public Health Abortion Grant Program (HB 930), the first of its kind nationally, which directs unused, segregated insurance premiums to fund abortion care for people who are uninsured, underinsured, or face other barriers. The state's Abortion Care Clinical Training Program receives $3.5 million annually. Medicaid and private insurance are both required to cover abortion without cost-sharing. > "shall be used: (i) to provide coverage for abortion care clinical services for insureds or enrollees in accordance with § 15–857 of this title; and (ii) for the Public Health Abortion Grant Program." > — Md. Code Ann., Ins. § 15-147 **Legal analysis** No Maryland statute penalizes funding abortion. The Public Health Abortion Grant Program (HB 930, enacted 2025) is codified at Md. Code Ann., State Fin. & Proc. § 6-226, directing unused premium funds collected under the ACA's abortion segregation requirement to a grant program administered by the Maryland Department of Health. The Abortion Care Clinical Training Program (HB 937, 2022) receives $3.5 million annually in state funding. Health-Gen. § 20-209 imposes no restrictions, and the constitutional amendment's strict-scrutiny standard would apply to any future attempt to restrict funding. Shield laws protect abortion funds and funders from out-of-state liability. *Sources — Semi-verified · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Ins. § 15-147, subsection (b), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/laws/StatuteText?article=gin§ion=15-147&enactments=false)* **Editor's note.** Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication. ### Mailing pills **Not banned; shield protection** Mailing abortion medication into or within Maryland is not prohibited by state law, and providers who mail pills across state lines are protected by shield laws. Maryland has no law that bans sending or receiving abortion medication by mail. Providers and organizations that mail mifepristone and misoprostol within Maryland or to patients in other states are protected by the state's shield laws. Federal law (the Comstock Act) has been invoked in policy debates as a potential barrier, but it has not been enforced against abortion medication mailing and Maryland's shield laws would resist any such enforcement within the state. There is also a specific data-privacy provision that prohibits health information exchanges from disclosing mifepristone data. > "a health information exchange or electronic health network may not disclose Mifepristone data or the diagnosis, procedure, medication, or related codes for abortion care" > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 4-302.5 **Legal analysis** No Maryland statute bans the mailing of abortion medication. The shield laws protect those who mail abortion medication across state lines: Md. Code Ann., State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312 bars state agencies from cooperating with interstate investigations; Crim. Proc. § 9-106 bars extradition for providing or aiding in legally protected health care; Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 9-302 bars court orders compelling testimony or evidence for out-of-state proceedings. Health-Gen. § 4-302.5 specifically protects mifepristone data from HIE disclosure. The Comstock Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 1461–1462) remains on the books at the federal level but has not been the basis of enforcement actions against abortion medication mailing; any future federal enforcement attempt would encounter Maryland's shield laws. The constitutional amendment (Art. 48) provides an additional barrier to state cooperation with federal mailing restrictions targeting reproductive freedom. *Sources — Semi-verified · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 4-302.5, [Westlaw](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N63972D80FA9011EDBE60A179AFFCABB9?viewType=FullText)* **Editor's note.** The Comstock Act's potential application to abortion medication mailing is a live federal policy debate but has not resulted in enforcement. This is a federal, not state, issue. Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication. ### Providing information **Protected; no restriction** Providing information, referrals, or websites for abortion is fully protected in Maryland, with no state restriction and with shield-law protections against out-of-state actions. There is no Maryland law that restricts giving someone information about how to get an abortion — whether in person, online, or through an organization. Websites like ineedana.com operate openly, and providers can advertise their services. The First Amendment protects this speech, and Maryland's legal framework does nothing to restrict it. Shield laws also protect those who provide referral information from out-of-state legal actions. The state's constitutional amendment protects decisions, which impliedly includes access to information necessary to effectuate those decisions. > "'Legally protected health care' means: (i) all reproductive health services, medications, and supplies related to the direct provision or support of the same" > — Md. Code Ann., State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312 **Legal analysis** No Maryland statute restricts providing information about abortion. The shield law's definition of 'legally protected health care' includes 'all reproductive health services, medications, and supplies related to the direct provision or support of the same' (State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312). Providing referrals is within the scope of protected activity. The First Amendment would independently protect truthful, non-misleading information about lawful abortion services under the commercial-speech doctrine and the professional-speech line of cases. The constitutional amendment's protection of the 'ability to make and effectuate decisions' to end a pregnancy extends logically to the information necessary to do so. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312, [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gsp§ion=2-312&enactments=false)* **Editor's note.** The direct-text page for § 2-312 did not load fully in the tool; the citation was verified via the Williams Institute fact sheet which quotes the statute. Re-verify the full text on the Maryland General Assembly site before publication. ### Civil bounty **No civil bounty law** Maryland has no SB8-style private civil enforcement mechanism or bounty law for abortion. Maryland has not enacted any law like Texas's SB 8 that allows private citizens to sue abortion providers or anyone who helps someone get an abortion. No one in Maryland can sue another person for damages for performing, obtaining, or assisting with an abortion. The state's entire legal framework is designed to protect abortion access, not to create private enforcement mechanisms against it. **Legal analysis** No Maryland statute creates a private civil cause of action for damages related to abortion provision, assistance, or receipt. The Texas Heartbeat Act (SB 8) model — with its private enforcement mechanism designed to evade pre-enforcement judicial review — has no analogue in Maryland. The constitutional amendment (Art. 48) would likely render any such bounty law unconstitutional under the Maryland Constitution's strict-scrutiny standard. Maryland's tradition has been to affirmatively protect and fund abortion access rather than restrict it through any enforcement mechanism, public or private. *Sources — No law on this point · High confidence* ## Procedural requirements ### Waiting period **No waiting period** Maryland has no mandatory waiting period between counseling and an abortion procedure. A person seeking an abortion in Maryland does not have to wait any mandatory period between an initial consultation and the procedure. Once the decision is made, the abortion can be performed as soon as the provider and patient are ready, which often means the consultation and procedure can happen on the same day. **Legal analysis** No Maryland statute imposes a waiting period. Bills proposing a 24-hour waiting period (such as HB 973 in 2023) have been introduced but have not passed. The absence of a waiting period means a single in-person visit is sufficient for procedural abortion. For medication abortion via telehealth, zero in-person visits are required. Maryland is one of a minority of states without a mandatory waiting period. The constitutional amendment (Art. 48) would subject any future waiting period to strict scrutiny — requiring the state to prove a compelling interest and that the delay is the least restrictive means of achieving it. *Sources — Verify before publication · High confidence · 'Abortion Laws in Maryland' — AbortionFinder.org, [AbortionFinder.org](https://www.abortionfinder.org/abortion-guides-by-state/abortion-in-maryland/abortion-laws)* **Editor's note.** The absence of a waiting period is confirmed by secondary sources. The Maryland Health-General Article Title 20 Subtitle 2 contains no waiting-period provision; the negative confirmation is inherent in the statute's structure as a protective rather than regulatory framework. ### Mandatory counseling **No state-scripted counseling** Maryland does not require state-scripted counseling or the delivery of state-mandated information before an abortion. In Maryland, there is no law requiring a person to receive state-scripted counseling before an abortion. Providers follow standard medical informed-consent practices, but the state does not mandate any particular message, script, or set of materials. There is no requirement to inform the patient about fetal development, alternatives to abortion, or potential psychological effects. The provider discusses risks and benefits as part of routine medical care, not under a legislative script. **Legal analysis** Maryland imposes no state-scripted informed consent requirements specific to abortion. General informed-consent requirements applicable to all medical procedures apply but do not single out abortion for special content. Bills proposing state-scripted counseling (such as HB 1401 in 2026, which would have required providers to inform patients about 'depression, infection, hemorrhage, breast cancer, danger to future pregnancies, infertility, and regret') have been introduced but not enacted. The constitutional amendment's strict-scrutiny standard would govern any future attempt to impose medically contested counseling requirements. *Sources — No law on this point · High confidence* **Editor's note.** Negative confirmation: Maryland Health-General Title 20 Subtitle 2 contains no mandatory-counseling provisions. General informed consent (common law and COMAR) applies to all medical procedures but is not abortion-specific. ### Ultrasound requirement **No ultrasound required** Maryland does not require an ultrasound before an abortion, nor any display or description of ultrasound images. A person seeking an abortion in Maryland is not required by law to have an ultrasound, to view an ultrasound image, or to hear a description of the ultrasound. Providers may use ultrasound as part of their clinical evaluation (to date the pregnancy, for example), but this is a medical decision, not a legal mandate. **Legal analysis** No Maryland statute mandates ultrasound before abortion, whether performed, offered, or displayed. Bills proposing mandatory ultrasound (such as HB 973 in 2023, which would have required an ultrasound at least 24 hours before an abortion) have been introduced but not passed. The constitutional amendment (Art. 48) would require any such mandate to survive strict scrutiny. *Sources — No law on this point · High confidence* **Editor's note.** Negative confirmation: no ultrasound mandate exists in Maryland's Health-General Article or COMAR provisions governing abortion. ### In person visits **Zero for medication; one for procedural** There is no legally required number of in-person visits for abortion in Maryland; medication abortion is available via telehealth with zero in-person visits. Maryland law does not require any minimum number of in-person visits for an abortion. Medication abortion is routinely provided via telehealth — meaning a person can have a video appointment and receive pills by mail, never setting foot in a clinic. For procedural (surgical) abortion, one in-person visit is typically sufficient because there is no waiting period and no mandatory counseling that must be done in person beforehand. > "Telehealth abortion is permitted in Maryland. Pills can arrive in as little as 2 days." > — ineedana.com — Maryland abortion provider guide **Legal analysis** Because Maryland imposes no waiting period, no state-scripted counseling requirement, and no mandatory ultrasound, the combined legal framework compels zero in-person visits for medication abortion (telehealth model) and one in-person visit for procedural abortion. Telehealth abortion is expressly permitted by Maryland providers and the state's legal infrastructure supports rather than impedes it. The absence of these procedural hurdles means Maryland's regime is among the least burdensome in the country. *Sources — Verify before publication · High confidence · ineedana.com — Maryland abortion provider guide, [ineedana.com](https://www.ineedana.com/us/maryland)* **Editor's note.** Negative confirmation from statutory silence: no in-person-visit requirements in the Health-General Article or COMAR. The secondary source (ineedana.com) confirms practical reality. ## Minors ### Parental involvement **Notification only; one parent** Maryland requires that one parent or guardian be notified before an abortion is performed on an unmarried minor, with broad exceptions and no consent requirement. In Maryland, if a person under 18 who is not married wants an abortion, the provider must notify one parent or guardian — but the parent does not have to consent. Only notice is required, not permission. There are important exceptions: the provider can skip notice if the minor does not live with a parent and a reasonable effort to give notice was unsuccessful. The provider can also decide not to notify a parent if, in the provider's professional judgment, notice could lead to physical or emotional abuse, the minor is mature enough to give informed consent alone, or notification would not be in the minor's best interest. The provider cannot be sued or prosecuted for making this decision in good faith. > "Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d) of this section, a qualified provider may not perform an abortion on an unmarried minor unless the qualified provider first gives notice to a parent or guardian of the minor." > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-103(b) **Legal analysis** Health-Gen. § 20-103(b) provides: 'Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d) of this section, a qualified provider may not perform an abortion on an unmarried minor unless the qualified provider first gives notice to a parent or guardian of the minor.' This is a notification requirement, not a consent requirement. Subsection (c) provides an exception where the minor does not live with a parent or guardian and reasonable efforts to give notice are unsuccessful. Subsection (d)(1) provides that the provider may perform the abortion without notice if, 'in the professional judgment of the qualified provider: (i) Notice to the parent or guardian may lead to physical or emotional abuse of the minor; (ii) The minor is mature and capable of giving informed consent to an abortion; or (iii) Notification would not be in the best interest of the minor.' Subsection (d)(2) immunizes the provider: 'The qualified provider is not liable for civil damages or subject to a criminal penalty for a decision under this subsection not to give notice.' Subsection (e) provides that certified mail with return receipt to the parent's last known address constitutes conclusive evidence of notice or reasonable effort. The statute also provides that a married minor or a minor who is a parent is excluded from the notification requirement (implicit in 'unmarried minor'). *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-103(b), subsection (b), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-103&enactments=False&archived=False)* ### Judicial bypass **No formal bypass; provider discretion** Maryland's parental notification law does not use a traditional judicial bypass; instead, the provider may waive notification based on maturity, best interests, or abuse risk, using their own professional judgment. Unlike many states that require a minor to go to court and convince a judge to waive parental involvement, Maryland's law gives the provider the authority to decide not to notify the parent. The provider can make this decision if the minor is mature and capable of informed consent, if notification is not in the minor's best interest, or if notification could lead to abuse. This means a minor does not have to navigate the court system to get an abortion without parental notification — the provider's professional judgment is enough. This system is faster, less intimidating, and less burdensome than a traditional judicial bypass. > "The qualified provider may perform the abortion, without notice to a parent or guardian of a minor if, in the professional judgment of the qualified provider: (i) Notice to the parent or guardian may lead to physical or emotional abuse of the minor; (ii) The minor is mature and capable of giving informed consent to an abortion; or (iii) Notification would not be in the best interest of the minor." > — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-103(d)(1) **Legal analysis** Health-Gen. § 20-103(d)(1) effectively substitutes a provider-discretion mechanism for a traditional judicial bypass. The provider may waive notification based on three independent grounds: risk of abuse, minor's maturity, or best interests. The provider is protected from civil damages and criminal penalties for this decision under § 20-103(d)(2). This model is less burdensome than a judicial bypass because it avoids court proceedings entirely. The Supreme Court's bypass requirement (Bellotti v. Baird, 443 U.S. 622 (1979); Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)) mandates an alternative to parental involvement; Maryland's provider-discretion model at least equals, and likely exceeds, the constitutional minimum by eliminating the court-based hurdles that make bypass inaccessible in practice. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-103(d)(1), subsection (d)(1), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-103&enactments=False&archived=False)* **Editor's note.** Maryland's provider-discretion model functions as a substitute for traditional judicial bypass. Some sources may classify this as 'judicial bypass available' because the maturity/best-interests standard mirrors the bypass standard; others may classify it as 'not applicable' because no court is involved. This entry treats it as a de facto bypass mechanism. ## Paternal spousal rights ### Consent or notice laws **None** Maryland has no spousal consent or paternal notice requirement for abortion on the books. Maryland law does not require a woman to get consent from or give notice to her spouse, the father of the pregnancy, or any other person before obtaining an abortion. The Supreme Court struck down spousal-consent laws in Planned Parenthood v. Danforth (1976) and spousal-notice requirements in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), but Maryland does not even have such a statute on the books to be rendered unenforceable — it simply never enacted one or repealed any that once existed. **Legal analysis** No spousal or paternal consent or notice statute appears in the Maryland Health-General Article or elsewhere in the Maryland Code. The state's protective framework (enacted 1991, effective 1992) from its inception did not include spousal/paternal involvement provisions. Under Planned Parenthood v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52 (1976), spousal consent requirements are unconstitutional. Under Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), spousal notice provisions that impose an 'undue burden' are also unconstitutional. Even if a pre-1991 Maryland statute contained such a provision, it was superseded by the 1991 legislation and the 1992 voter referendum. Dobbs does not revive these provisions, because (a) no such statute exists in current Maryland law, and (b) Danforth and Casey remain binding federal precedent on this specific point unless explicitly overruled. Maryland's constitutional amendment (Art. 48) independently forbids any such requirement as a burden on the fundamental right to reproductive freedom. *Sources — No law on this point · High confidence · Planned Parenthood v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52 (1976), [Embryo Project / Arizona State University](https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/planned-parenthood-v-danforth-1976)* **Editor's note.** Negative confirmation: no spousal/paternal consent or notice statute exists in current Maryland law. ### Enforceability **Not applicable; no such law exists** Because Maryland has no spousal or paternal consent/notice law, enforceability under Danforth and Casey is moot. This issue does not arise in Maryland because there is simply no spousal or paternal consent or notice law on the books. If one were enacted, it would violate both the U.S. Constitution under Danforth and Casey and the Maryland Constitution under Article 48. Dobbs did not overrule Danforth's spousal-consent holding. **Legal analysis** The enforceability inquiry is moot. Danforth (1976) invalidated spousal consent, and Casey (1992) invalidated spousal notice as an 'undue burden.' Dobbs (2022) overruled Roe and Casey's general viability framework but did not separately address spousal-involvement provisions. It is arguable whether the post-Dobbs Supreme Court would revisit Danforth's spousal-consent holding, but no Maryland statute exists to test that question. Article 48 of the Maryland Constitution independently prohibits such a requirement under strict scrutiny. *Sources — No law on this point · High confidence* ### Other paternal rights **Wrongful-death standing for fetus** A father may bring a wrongful-death action for a viable fetus under Maryland law; no other paternal rights attach to the abortion decision. Under Maryland law, a father has no right to interfere with or be notified about an abortion decision. However, if a viable fetus is killed by a third party (not in the context of abortion), the father may have standing to bring a wrongful-death action. Under Kandel v. White (1995), a wrongful-death claim exists for a viable fetus even if not born alive. For a non-viable fetus, there is no wrongful-death claim. The father has no right to seek an injunction to stop an abortion. > "a cause of action for the wrongful death of a fetus may be maintained when the child is born alive, regardless of viability, and when the fetus is viable at the time of injury, even if not born alive." > — Kandel v. White, 339 Md. 432, 663 A.2d 1264 (1995) **Legal analysis** Under Maryland case law (Kandel v. White, 339 Md. 432, 663 A.2d 1264 (1995)), a wrongful-death action may be maintained on behalf of a viable fetus, even if stillborn. This right belongs to the beneficiaries listed in Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-904(a), which includes the father if paternity is established. However, this is a third-party-harm cause of action (e.g., car accident, assault), not a mechanism to challenge an abortion. No Maryland statute grants the father a right to notice, consent, or veto of an abortion decision, nor standing to seek an injunction. The putative-father registry (Family Law Article) is relevant to adoption and parental rights, not to abortion decisions. *Sources — Semi-verified · High confidence · Kandel v. White, 339 Md. 432, 663 A.2d 1264 (1995), slip op. at 10-12, [Maryland Courts](https://www.mdcourts.gov/data/opinions/coa/1995/127a94.pdf)* **Editor's note.** Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication. ## Fetal personhood ### Fetal homicide law **Viable-fetus-only; abortion excluded** Maryland's fetal homicide law applies only to viable fetuses, expressly excludes abortion and the pregnant woman's own acts, and explicitly disclaims fetal personhood. Maryland law allows prosecution for murder or manslaughter of a viable fetus — that is, a fetus that could survive outside the womb — when a third party intentionally or recklessly causes its death. However, the law is very clear that this does not apply to abortion (which is separately protected by law), does not apply to a pregnant woman's own actions regarding her fetus, does not apply to licensed medical professionals providing lawful medical care, and explicitly says it does not confer personhood or rights on the fetus. This means that if a person assaults a pregnant woman and causes the death of her viable fetus, that person can be charged with murder or manslaughter. But the law cannot be used to restrict abortion or prosecute a pregnant woman. > "Nothing in this section applies to or infringes on a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy as stated in § 20-209 of the Health-General Article... Nothing in this section shall be construed to confer personhood or any rights on the fetus." > — Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 2-103(d), (g) **Legal analysis** Crim. Law § 2-103 is narrowly drafted. Subsection (b) authorizes prosecution 'for murder or manslaughter of a viable fetus.' Subsection (d) states: 'Nothing in this section applies to or infringes on a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy as stated in § 20-209 of the Health-General Article.' Subsection (e): 'Nothing in this section subjects a physician or other licensed medical professional to liability for fetal death that occurs in the course of administering lawful medical care.' Subsection (f): 'Nothing in this section applies to an act or failure to act of a pregnant woman with regard to her own fetus.' Subsection (g): 'Nothing in this section shall be construed to confer personhood or any rights on the fetus.' Viability is defined by cross-reference to Health-Gen. § 20-209(a). This is one of the most carefully abortion-protective fetal homicide statutes in the country. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 2-103(d), (g), subsections (d), (g), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcr§ion=2-103&enactments=false)* ### Wrongful death **Viable-fetus claims permitted** Maryland recognizes a wrongful-death claim for a viable fetus even if stillborn, but not for a non-viable fetus, under Kandel v. White. In Maryland, if a third party's negligence or wrongful act causes the death of a viable fetus (one that could survive outside the womb), the family can bring a wrongful-death lawsuit. This claim can be made even if the fetus was stillborn. However, if the fetus was not yet viable, there is no wrongful-death claim under Maryland law. The standard was set by the Maryland Court of Appeals in Kandel v. White (1995). This is a civil claim for damages against a third party (like a negligent driver) and does not apply to abortion, which is separately protected by law. > "a cause of action for the wrongful death of a fetus may be maintained when the child is born alive, regardless of viability, and when the fetus is viable at the time of injury, even if not born alive." > — Kandel v. White, 339 Md. 432, 663 A.2d 1264 (1995) **Legal analysis** In Kandel v. White, 339 Md. 432, 663 A.2d 1264 (1995), the Maryland Court of Appeals held that a wrongful-death action may be brought for a viable fetus even if stillborn, but dismissed the claim for a non-viable stillborn fetus. The court stated that a cause of action 'may be maintained when the child is born alive, regardless of viability, and when the fetus is viable at the time of injury, even if not born alive.' This was reaffirmed in Smith v. Borello, 370 Md. 227, 803 A.2d 508 (2002). The wrongful-death statute (Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-904) does not itself define 'person' or 'child' to include a fetus; the scope of fetal wrongful-death claims is therefore governed by the common-law holding in Kandel. The viability standard aligns with the abortion statute (Health-Gen. § 20-209). Because the wrongful-death action is a civil remedy against third-party tortfeasors, it does not create a tension with abortion rights. *Sources — Semi-verified · High confidence · Kandel v. White, 339 Md. 432, 663 A.2d 1264 (1995), slip op. at 10-12, [Maryland Courts](https://www.mdcourts.gov/data/opinions/coa/1995/127a94.pdf)* **Editor's note.** Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication. ### Personhood definition **No fetal personhood language** Maryland has no statutory or constitutional definition that includes the unborn as a 'person,' and the fetal homicide statute explicitly disclaims that it 'confer[s] personhood or any rights on the fetus.' Maryland law does not define a fetus as a 'person,' 'human being,' or 'child' for purposes of its general statutes. The one place where this could have crept in — the fetal homicide law — includes an explicit disclaimer: 'Nothing in this section shall be construed to confer personhood or any rights on the fetus.' The state constitution's reproductive freedom amendment (Article 48) applies to 'every person' but speaks of 'decisions to prevent, continue, or end one's own pregnancy,' making clear that the protected person is the pregnant individual, not the fetus. No other provision of Maryland law purports to define the unborn as a person. > "Nothing in this section shall be construed to confer personhood or any rights on the fetus." > — Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 2-103(g) **Legal analysis** Crim. Law § 2-103(g) expressly states: 'Nothing in this section shall be construed to confer personhood or any rights on the fetus.' This is an anti-personhood provision, not a personhood provision. The Maryland Constitution's Art. 48 protects 'every person['s]... fundamental right to reproductive freedom' with respect to 'one's own pregnancy,' distinguishing the rights-holder from the fetus. No other Maryland statute or constitutional provision defines 'person' or 'human being' to include the unborn. Attempts to introduce personhood language (such as HB 997, 'Equal Protection for Unborn Human Life Act,' proposed in 2021) have not been enacted. The statutory and constitutional frameworks are internally consistent in declining to confer legal personhood on a fetus. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 2-103(g), subsection (g), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcr§ion=2-103&enactments=false)* ### Contradictions analysis Maryland's legal treatment of fetal personhood is internally consistent in its refusal to confer personhood on the fetus, but it operates with a practical tension: the state simultaneously (a) protects abortion as a fundamental constitutional right, (b) permits homicide prosecutions for third-party killing of a viable fetus, and (c) permits wrongful-death civil claims for viable fetuses. The key to the consistency is the viability line — the same line drawn in the abortion statute (Health-Gen. § 20-209) serves as the threshold for both the criminal fetal-homicide statute (Crim. Law § 2-103) and the civil wrongful-death jurisprudence (Kandel v. White). A fetus that is not viable triggers none of these interests. Moreover, the fetal-homicide statute contains a cluster of anti-personhood provisions: it expressly exempts (i) abortion, (ii) lawful medical care, (iii) the pregnant woman's own acts, and (iv) any implication of fetal personhood. The express disavowal of personhood in § 2-103(g) — 'Nothing in this section shall be construed to confer personhood or any rights on the fetus' — is a rare and unequivocal legislative statement that the criminal-law protection of the viable fetus exists for crime-victim and public-safety purposes, not as a back door to fetal personhood. The constitutional amendment (Art. 48) further entrenches this consistency by making the right to end a pregnancy fundamental. The Maryland framework thus avoids the contradictions seen in states that simultaneously define the unborn as a 'person' at fertilization while maintaining a statutory carve-out for abortion. In Maryland, the fetus is not a person for any legal purpose; the criminal and civil consequences of fetal death exist as a sui generis category tethered to viability and subject to explicit abortion-related exemptions. ## Telehealth & interstate questions ### Telehealth prescribing **Fully permitted** Telehealth prescribing of abortion medication is legal and actively practiced in Maryland, with no state law requiring an in-person visit. People in Maryland can obtain abortion medication through a telehealth appointment — by video or phone — and have the pills mailed to them. There is no Maryland law requiring an in-person visit to get medication abortion pills. This is a routine and widely available method of care. As of mid-2026, a federal appellate decision restricting telehealth prescribing of mifepristone is stayed by the Supreme Court, so nationwide access continues. Maryland providers also prescribe abortion medication via telehealth to patients in other states, relying on the state's shield laws for protection. > "Telehealth abortion is permitted in Maryland. Pills can arrive in as little as 2 days." > — ineedana.com — Maryland abortion provider guide **Legal analysis** No Maryland statute restricts telehealth abortion prescribing. The 'qualified provider' framework applies uniformly to in-person and telehealth care. Md. Code Ann., Health Occ. § 1-1001 et seq. governs telehealth generally and does not exclude abortion. Shield laws (State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312; Crim. Proc. § 9-106; Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 9-302) protect providers who prescribe across state lines. The data-privacy law (Health-Gen. § 4-302.5) specifically protects mifepristone data. Federal litigation (Louisiana v. FDA) threatens telehealth mifepristone access via the FDA REMS, but as of July 2026, the Supreme Court has extended a stay maintaining the status quo. Maryland's state-level protections operate independently of the federal framework. *Sources — Semi-verified · High confidence · ineedana.com — Maryland abortion provider guide, [ineedana.com](https://www.ineedana.com/us/maryland)* **Editor's note.** Federal FDA litigation creates uncertainty about the nationwide telehealth mifepristone framework, but Maryland state law does not independently restrict telehealth abortion. Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication. ### Out of state travel **Fully protected; no restriction** Maryland residents may travel out of state for an abortion with no legal restriction, and the state's shield laws protect those who assist with such travel. There is no Maryland law that restricts a person from traveling to another state for an abortion. Maryland does not have an 'abortion trafficking' law that makes it a crime to help a minor or anyone else travel for abortion care. The state's legal framework fully protects out-of-state travel as part of the fundamental right to reproductive freedom. The shield laws also protect Maryland-based helpers from out-of-state investigations targeting travel assistance. **Legal analysis** No Maryland statute restricts travel for abortion. The constitutional right to travel (Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999)) independently protects interstate movement for lawful purposes. Maryland's constitutional amendment (Art. 48) protects the 'ability to make and effectuate decisions' to end a pregnancy, which encompasses travel to do so. Shield laws at State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312 and Crim. Proc. § 9-106 protect helpers from out-of-state investigation or extradition. Maryland has not enacted, and shows no movement toward, 'abortion trafficking' legislation of the kind seen in Idaho, Tennessee, and other restrictive states. *Sources — No law on this point · High confidence* **Editor's note.** Negative confirmation: no travel restriction exists in Maryland law. The absence of such a law in a protective jurisdiction is expected. ### Shield or hostile laws **Comprehensive shield protections** Maryland has enacted robust shield laws protecting providers, patients, and helpers from out-of-state investigations, extradition, subpoenas, professional discipline, and civil judgments related to legally protected reproductive and gender-affirming health care. Maryland is a 'shield state' — it has laws that actively protect people involved in abortion care from legal actions originating in other states. These protections include: state agencies cannot help with out-of-state investigations; the Governor cannot extradite someone for providing or helping with legally protected health care; Maryland courts cannot issue subpoenas or compel testimony for out-of-state abortion cases; health care licensing boards cannot discipline providers for offering legally protected care; out-of-state civil judgments about abortion cannot be enforced in Maryland courts; and insurance companies cannot penalize providers for offering protected care. Privacy protections also prevent health information exchanges from disclosing abortion-related data. These shield laws cover both reproductive health care and gender-affirming care. > "State agencies or individuals acting on their behalf may not provide information or expend resources in furtherance of an interstate investigation or proceeding seeking to impose liability or sanction related to 'legally protected health care'... if the activity would not be subject to liability or sanction in Maryland." > — Md. Code Ann., State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312 **Legal analysis** Maryland's shield laws are codified across multiple articles: (1) State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312: bars state agencies and employees from providing information or resources to interstate investigations involving 'legally protected health care' (defined to include all reproductive health services). (2) Crim. Proc. § 9-106: bars the Governor from surrendering a person to another state if the alleged act involves 'providing, procuring, or aiding in legally protected health care' that would not be a crime in Maryland. (3) Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 9-302: bars judges from ordering testimony or production of evidence for out-of-state proceedings involving legally protected health care. (4) Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 10-408: bars ex parte orders for interception of communications for investigating legally protected health care. (5) Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 9-402: requires a sworn statement that out-of-state subpoenas do not relate to legally protected health care. (6) Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 11-802: bars enforcement of out-of-state judgments concerning legally protected health care unless the conduct would be prohibited under Maryland law. (7) Health Occ. § 1-227: bars health occupations boards from adverse actions against practitioners for providing legally protected health care. (8) Ins. § 19-117: bars professional liability insurers from taking adverse action against practitioners for providing legally protected care. (9) Health-Gen. § 4-302.5: bars HIE disclosure of mifepristone data and abortion codes. SB 119 (2024) expanded 'legally protected health care' to include gender-affirming care. The Maryland Online Data Privacy Act (HB 567, 2024, effective October 1, 2025) adds protections for consumer health data including reproductive health information. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312, p. 1, [Williams Institute / UCLA Law](https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Shield-Law-MD-Jul-2025.pdf)* **Editor's note.** Shield law provisions were verified through the Williams Institute fact sheet. Direct statutory text should be re-verified on the Maryland General Assembly website for final publication. ## Funding and insurance ### Medicaid **Broader than Hyde; all abortions covered** Maryland Medicaid covers abortion care services in all situations, beyond the federal Hyde Amendment limitations, without cost-sharing or restrictions. Maryland's Medicaid program covers abortion for any reason, not just the narrow federal Hyde Amendment exceptions for rape, incest, and life endangerment. The Abortion Care Access Act of 2022 (HB 937) required Maryland Medicaid to cover abortion care services 'without restriction' and without any cost-sharing such as copays or deductibles. This means a person enrolled in Maryland Medicaid can obtain an abortion without paying anything out of pocket. The state uses its own funds (not federal funds) to cover abortions that fall outside the Hyde categories, as required by federal law. > "provide coverage of abortion care services to program recipients in the manner described in § 15-857(b)(1)(ii) — without a deductible, coinsurance, copayment, or any other cost-sharing requirement" > — Maryland-2022 HB937 Chaptered, codified at Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 15-139 **Legal analysis** HB 937 (Abortion Care Access Act, 2022) amended Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 15-139 to require the Maryland Medical Assistance Program to 'provide coverage of abortion care services to program recipients in the manner described in § 15-857(b)(1)(ii),' which mandates coverage 'without a deductible, coinsurance, copayment, or any other cost-sharing requirement.' This goes substantially beyond the federal Hyde Amendment, which restricts federal Medicaid funds to abortions in cases of rape, incest, or life endangerment. Maryland uses state-only funds to cover abortion beyond Hyde parameters, as authorized by federal law. The Maryland Department of Health issued Provider Transmittal 46-25, effective November 18, 2024, clarifying that 'abortion services are available to all pregnant individuals, including those under Maryland Medicaid's family planning program.' *Sources — Semi-verified · High confidence · Maryland-2022 HB937 Chaptered, codified at Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 15-139, [LegiScan / Maryland General Assembly](https://www.mgaleg.maryland.gov/2022RS/chapters_noln/Ch_56_hb0937T.pdf) · Maryland Medicaid Provider Transmittal 46-25, [Maryland Department of Health](https://health.maryland.gov/mmcp/provider/Documents/transmittals/PT%2046-25%20Clarification%20of%20Maryland%20Medicaid%20Abortion%20Care%20Coverage.pdf)* **Editor's note.** Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication. ### Private insurance **Required to cover; no cost-sharing** Maryland requires private health insurance plans to cover abortion care services without deductibles, copays, or coinsurance, unless the plan is a religious employer plan exempt under the ACA. In Maryland, private health insurance plans that cover labor and delivery services must also cover abortion care — and they must do so without any out-of-pocket costs like deductibles, copays, or coinsurance. This applies to individual, small-group, and large-group plans. The only exception is for religious employers who have opted out of abortion coverage under the Affordable Care Act. This means that for most insured Marylanders, abortion is fully covered with no cost at the point of service. > "An entity subject to this section shall: (1) cover abortion care services without: (i) a deductible, coinsurance, copayment, or any other cost-sharing requirement; (ii) utilization review; or (iii) a prior authorization requirement." > — Md. Code Ann., Ins. § 15-857(b)(1) **Legal analysis** Ins. § 15-857, enacted by HB 937 (2022), provides: 'An entity subject to this section shall: (1) cover abortion care services without: (i) a deductible, coinsurance, copayment, or any other cost-sharing requirement; (ii) utilization review; or (iii) a prior authorization requirement.' The entities subject to the section are 'insurers and nonprofit health service plans that provide labor and delivery coverage to individuals or groups.' ACA-compliant plans that are exempt from abortion coverage due to religious employer status (under 45 C.F.R. § 156.130) are excluded. The Maryland Health Benefit Exchange must implement a special enrollment period for individuals who need abortion coverage. *Sources — Verified at source · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Ins. § 15-857(b)(1), subsection (b)(1), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gin§ion=15-857&enactments=false)* ### Exchange plans **Must cover abortion** ACA marketplace plans in Maryland must cover abortion care services with no cost-sharing, consistent with the state's private insurance mandate. Health insurance plans sold through Maryland's ACA marketplace (Maryland Health Connection) must cover abortion services without cost-sharing, just like other private plans in the state. For plans that cover abortion beyond the Hyde categories, the ACA requires separate premium billing for the abortion coverage portion. Maryland's 2025 Public Health Abortion Grant Program (HB 930) directs unused, segregated premium funds to a program that provides grants to abortion providers and funds for people who are uninsured or face coverage gaps. > "Any premium funds collected by an entity subject to this section for abortion coverage in accordance with § 1303(b)(2)(B) and (c) of the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act shall be used: (i) to provide coverage for abortion care services for insureds or enrollees in accordance with § 15-857 of this title; and (ii) for the Public Health Abortion Grant Program." > — Md. Code Ann., Ins. § 15-147(b) **Legal analysis** The Maryland Health Benefit Exchange (MHBE) implements the coverage requirements of Ins. § 15-857 for qualified health plans (QHPs). The ACA's § 1303 requires that QHPs covering non-Hyde abortion services collect a separate premium from each enrollee for that coverage. Maryland's HB 930 (2025) amended Ins. § 15-147 and State Fin. & Proc. § 6-226 to create the Public Health Abortion Grant Program, directing unused segregated abortion premium funds to provider grants and abortion funds. This is the first state-level operationalization of the ACA's segregation requirement. *Sources — Semi-verified · High confidence · Md. Code Ann., Ins. § 15-147(b), subsection (b), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/laws/StatuteText?article=gin§ion=15-147&enactments=false)* **Editor's note.** Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication. ### State funding of providers **State actively funds providers** Maryland affirmatively funds abortion providers through the Abortion Care Clinical Training Program ($3.5 million annually) and the Public Health Abortion Grant Program. Maryland does not defund abortion providers — it actively funds them. The state allocates $3.5 million per year to the Abortion Care Clinical Training Program, which trains providers to perform abortions and aims to increase provider diversity. The Public Health Abortion Grant Program (established in 2025) uses segregated insurance premium funds to provide grants to abortion providers and to abortion funds that serve uninsured and underinsured individuals. Governor Moore has also allocated $5 million to increase Medicaid provider reimbursement rates for abortion care. Maryland has not enacted any state-level defunding of Planned Parenthood or other abortion providers from state family-planning programs. > "the Governor must include an appropriation of $3.5 million annually for the Abortion Care Clinical Training Program" > — HB 937 Fiscal and Policy Note (2022) **Legal analysis** HB 937 (Abortion Care Access Act, 2022) established the Abortion Care Clinical Training Program with an annual appropriation of $3.5 million. HB 930 (Public Health Abortion Grant Program, 2025) directed unused ACA segregated premium funds to grants for abortion providers and funds. The Moore-Miller Administration has invested an additional $10.6 million for the training program administration and $5 million to increase Medicaid provider reimbursement. There is no state-law defunding of abortion providers — Maryland has rejected the Title X 'gag rule' approach and has taken steps to backfill federal funding when threatened. The Reproductive Health Services Plans requirement (HB 477, 2023) mandates that public universities develop plans to provide or refer students to comprehensive reproductive health services, including abortion. *Sources — Semi-verified · High confidence · HB 937 Fiscal and Policy Note (2022), [Maryland Department of Legislative Services](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2022RS/fnotes/bil_0007/hb0937.pdf)* **Editor's note.** Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication. ## Penalties | Actor | Offense | Penalty | Verification | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Qualified provider (physician, NP, nurse-midwife, PA) | No abortion-specific criminal offense. Good-faith clinical decisions under § 20-209 are expressly immune from civil damages and criminal penalties. | None for good-faith provision. Bad-faith or unlicensed practice may trigger general professional discipline or criminal laws. Federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban: fine and/or imprisonment up to 2 years. | Verified at source | | Pregnant woman | None. Express exemption from fetal homicide. No abortion-specific offense applies. | None. | Verified at source | | Non-provider helper (fund, driver, employer, friend, parent) | None. No statute criminalizes aiding abortion. Shield laws protect against out-of-state extradition and process. | None under Maryland law. | Verified at source | | Third party causing coerced ingestion of abortion-inducing drug | Misdemeanor (HB 1186, 2025 session — prohibiting knowingly causing another to ingest an abortion-inducing drug when the person knows or believes the other is pregnant and has not consented). | The bill was introduced and heard in committee in the 2025 session. Its enactment status should be verified. If enacted, would create a new criminal offense for coercive administration. | Verify before publication | ## Recent changes - **April 9, 2022** — Maryland legislature overrode Governor Larry Hogan's veto to enact the Abortion Care Access Act (HB 937), expanding the definition of 'qualified provider' to include nurse practitioners, nurse-midwives, physician assistants, and licensed certified midwives; requiring Medicaid and private insurance to cover abortion without cost-sharing; and establishing the $3.5 million annual Abortion Care Clinical Training Program. *Sources — HB 937 (2022), Chapter 56, [Maryland General Assembly](https://www.mgaleg.maryland.gov/2022RS/chapters_noln/Ch_56_hb0937T.pdf)* - **May 3, 2023** — Governor Wes Moore signed the Reproductive Health Protection Act (SB 859) and other shield-law legislation, protecting providers, patients, and helpers from out-of-state investigations, extradition, subpoenas, professional discipline, and civil judgments related to legally protected health care. Governor Moore also announced a partnership to purchase a substantial stockpile of mifepristone. *Sources — SB 859 (2023), Chapter 252, [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/SB0859?ys=2023RS)* - **October 1, 2024** — The Trans Shield Act (SB 119 of 2024) took effect, expanding the definition of 'legally protected health care' to include gender-affirming care under Maryland's shield laws. *Sources — SB 119 (2024), [Washington Blade / Williams Institute](https://www.freestate-justice.org/marylands-trans-shield-act-takes-effect-washington-blade)* - **November 5, 2024** — Maryland voters approved Question 1, the Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment, by approximately 74%, adding Article 48 to the Maryland Constitution's Declaration of Rights. The amendment guarantees every person the fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including the ability to prevent, continue, or end a pregnancy, subject only to compelling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means. *Sources — Md. Const., Declaration of Rights, Art. 48 (2024), Article 48, [Westlaw / Maryland General Assembly](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N064507504C1711EEACD6F0BA0BFB33CA?viewType=FullText)* - **January 17, 2025** — Governor Wes Moore signed the proclamation officially enshrining the Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment (Article 48) into the Maryland Constitution. *Sources — Md. Const., Declaration of Rights, Art. 48, Credits, [Westlaw](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N064507504C1711EEACD6F0BA0BFB33CA?viewType=FullText)* - **May 29, 2025** — Governor Moore signed HB 930, creating the first-in-the-nation Public Health Abortion Grant Program, which directs unused segregated insurance premium funds to grants for abortion providers and abortion funds serving uninsured and underinsured individuals. *Sources — HB 930 (2025), [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/hb0930?ys=2025RS)* - **June 2, 2026** — Governor Moore signed HB 750, codifying a state-level version of the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) to ensure emergency abortion care remains protected under state law regardless of changes to federal EMTALA interpretation. *Sources — HB 750 (2026), Chapter 424, [Maryland General Assembly](https://www.wypr.org/wypr-news/2026-06-02/maryland-codifies-state-level-emergency-abortion-access-amid-federal-uncertainty)* ## Pending changes ### Louisiana v. FDA (federal; affects Maryland) (Litigation) **Status.** U.S. Supreme Court has extended a stay preserving nationwide telehealth mifepristone access pending further review. A Fifth Circuit panel had ruled to end telemedicine access to mifepristone nationally in May 2026. If the Supreme Court ultimately upholds the Fifth Circuit decision, telehealth prescribing and mailing of mifepristone would be restricted nationwide, including in Maryland. Maryland's shield laws and mifepristone stockpile would provide some buffer, but FDA compliance requirements could limit in-state telehealth prescribing. *Sources — Louisiana v. FDA, U.S. Supreme Court (2026), [NPR](https://www.npr.org/2026/05/02/nx-s1-5808361/a-federal-appeals-court-restricts-access-to-abortion-pills-via-telehealth)* ### HB 49 / 'Heartbeat Bill' (2026 session) (Legislation) **Status.** Introduced in the 2026 session. Would restrict abortion after detection of a fetal heartbeat. Given Democratic supermajorities in both chambers and the constitutional amendment, the bill has negligible prospects of passage. Would, if enacted and upheld, prohibit abortion after approximately six weeks' gestation. Near-certain to be struck down under the Maryland Constitution's Article 48 strict-scrutiny standard even if enacted, which is itself extremely unlikely. *Sources — HB 49, Maryland 2026 Regular Session, [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2026RS/fnotes/bil_0009/hb0049.pdf)* ### HB 1131 / 'Pregnancy Outcome Protection Act' (2026 session) (Legislation) **Status.** Introduced in the 2026 session. Would prohibit investigation, civil liability, or criminal prosecution of individuals who experience pregnancy loss absent independent evidence of criminal conduct unrelated to the pregnancy. Would further codify protection against criminalization of pregnancy outcomes, including self-managed abortion. Consistent with existing statutory and constitutional protections; would add an explicit statutory shield. *Sources — HB 1131, Maryland 2026 Regular Session, [Maryland General Assembly](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2026RS/fnotes/bil_0001/hb1131.pdf)* ## Key authorities - **Maryland Constitution, Declaration of Rights, Article 48 (Right to Reproductive Freedom)** — MD Const., Decl. of Rights, Art. 48 _(Constitution)_ · [govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N06450…](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N064507504C1711EEACD6F0BA0BFB33CA?viewType=FullText) The supreme source of abortion protection in Maryland, establishing reproductive freedom as a fundamental right subject to strict scrutiny, effective January 17, 2025. - **Md. Code, Health-Gen. § 20-209 (State non-interference with abortion)** — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-209 _(Statute)_ · [mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-209&enactments=false) The foundational statutory protection, enacted in 1991 and voter-approved in 1992, prohibiting state interference with abortion before viability and post-viability for life, health, or fetal anomaly. - **Md. Code, Health-Gen. §§ 20-207, 20-208 (Qualified provider provisions)** — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. §§ 20-207, 20-208 _(Statute)_ · [codes.findlaw.com/md/health-general/m…](https://codes.findlaw.com/md/health-general/md-code-health-gen-sect-20-207) Defines who may perform abortions — not limited to physicians but includes NPs, nurse-midwives, PAs, and other licensed practitioners within scope. - **Md. Code, Health-Gen. § 20-103 (Parental notification)** — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-103 _(Statute)_ · [mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=ghg§ion=20-103&enactments=False&archived=False) The only procedural hurdle in Maryland law: requires notice to one parent for unmarried minors, with broad provider-discretion exceptions substituting for judicial bypass. - **Md. Code, Crim. Law § 2-103 (Fetal homicide — viable fetus)** — Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 2-103 _(Statute)_ · [mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcr§ion=2-103&enactments=false) Creates homicide liability for killing a viable fetus by a third party, but expressly exempts abortion, the pregnant woman, lawful medical care, and disclaims fetal personhood. - **Md. Code, Ins. § 15-857 (Insurance coverage mandate)** — Md. Code Ann., Ins. § 15-857 _(Statute)_ · [mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gin§ion=15-857&enactments=false) Requires all private insurance plans covering labor and delivery to cover abortion care services without cost-sharing, deductibles, or prior authorization. - **Reproductive Health Protection Act (SB 859 of 2023) — Shield Law** — Md. Code Ann., State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312; Crim. Proc. § 9-106; Cts. & Jud. Proc. §§ 9-302, 9-402, 10-408, 11-802; Health Occ. § 1-227; Ins. § 19-117 _(Statute)_ · [williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/…](https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Shield-Law-MD-Jul-2025.pdf) Comprehensive shield-law package protecting Maryland providers, patients, and helpers from out-of-state investigation, extradition, subpoena, professional discipline, and judgment enforcement. - **Abortion Care Access Act (HB 937 of 2022)** — Chapter 56, Acts of 2022 _(Statute)_ · [mgaleg.maryland.gov/2022RS/chapters_noln/Ch_56_hb0937T.pdf](https://www.mgaleg.maryland.gov/2022RS/chapters_noln/Ch_56_hb0937T.pdf) Expanded provider categories, mandated insurance and Medicaid coverage without cost-sharing, and created the Abortion Care Clinical Training Program. - **Md. Code, Health-Gen. § 4-302.5 (Mifepristone data privacy)** — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 4-302.5 _(Statute)_ · [govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N63972…](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/N63972D80FA9011EDBE60A179AFFCABB9?viewType=FullText) Prohibits health information exchanges from disclosing mifepristone data and abortion-related diagnostic codes; violation is a misdemeanor with up to $10,000 in daily fines. - **Md. Code, Health-Gen. § 20-214 (Conscience clause)** — Md. Code Ann., Health-Gen. § 20-214 _(Statute)_ · [codes.findlaw.com/md/health-general/m…](https://codes.findlaw.com/md/health-general/md-code-health-gen-sect-20-214) Protects individuals and hospitals from being required to perform, participate in, or refer for abortions; refusal may not be basis for discipline or recriminatory action. - **Kandel v. White (1995)** — Kandel v. White, 339 Md. 432, 663 A.2d 1264 (1995) _(Case)_ · [mdcourts.gov/data/opinions/coa/1995/127a94.pdf](https://www.mdcourts.gov/data/opinions/coa/1995/127a94.pdf) Establishes that a wrongful-death claim lies for a viable fetus even if stillborn, but not for non-viable fetuses, aligning civil law with the abortion statute's viability framework. - **Moira E. Akers v. State of Maryland (2025)** — Moira E. Akers v. State, No. 7, Sept. Term 2024 (Md. 2025) _(Case)_ · [courts.state.md.us/data/opinions/coa/2025/7a24.pdf](https://www.courts.state.md.us/data/opinions/coa/2025/7a24.pdf) Reinforced that a woman's internet searches about lawful abortion are irrelevant as a matter of law to show intent to harm a newborn, underscoring Maryland courts' treatment of abortion as protected conduct. - **COMAR 10.12.01 — Surgical Abortion Facilities** — COMAR 10.12.01 _(Regulation)_ · [law.cornell.edu/regulations/marylan…](https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/maryland/title-10/part-3/subtitle-12/chapter-10.12.01) Establishes licensure and operating standards for surgical abortion facilities, adopted under authority of Health-Gen. § 20-209, without imposing medically unnecessary TRAP requirements. - **Public Health Abortion Grant Program (HB 930 of 2025)** — Chapter of 2025 (HB 930); codified at Md. Code Ann., Ins. § 15-147; State Fin. & Proc. § 6-226 _(Statute)_ · [mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/hb0930](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/hb0930?ys=2025RS) First-in-the-nation program directing unused ACA segregated premium funds to grants for abortion providers and funds serving the uninsured and underinsured. - **State-level EMTALA (HB 750 of 2026)** — Chapter 424, Acts of 2026 (HB 750) _(Statute)_ · [wypr.org/wypr-news/2026-06-0…](https://www.wypr.org/wypr-news/2026-06-02/maryland-codifies-state-level-emergency-abortion-access-amid-federal-uncertainty) Codifies emergency abortion protections in state law regardless of federal EMTALA interpretation changes, ensuring that hospitals must provide stabilizing abortion care in medical emergencies. ## Research notes > Overall confidence: High. Analysis current as of July 12, 2026; research completed July 12, 2026. This survey was compiled on July 14, 2026. Several items merit re-verification before publication: (1) Confirm the Supreme Court's disposition of Louisiana v. FDA, which directly affects telehealth mifepristone access nationwide. (2) Verify whether HB 1186 (2025 coercive abortion-drug bill) was enacted. (3) Directly pull the full text of State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312 and Ins. § 15-857 from the Maryland General Assembly statute-text tool to confirm the quote attributed to those sections. (4) Cross-check the current status of HB 1131 (Pregnancy Outcome Protection Act, 2026 session) — as of the research date, it had been introduced but not yet enacted. (5) COMAR 10.12.01 was accessed via Cornell LII; verify the official text at regs.maryland.gov. (6) Governor Moore's mifepristone stockpile was announced in April 2023; verify the current stockpile status and any legislative codification. Unresolved points: The full text of Ins. § 15-857 and State Pers. & Pens. § 2-312 could not be retrieved directly from the Maryland General Assembly website due to technical limitations; the statutory content was verified via Westlaw and Williams Institute fact sheets. Direct verification on the MGA site is recommended before publication. — The exact enactment status of HB 1186 (Women's Freedom From Coercion Act, 2025) was not definitively confirmed — it was introduced and heard in committee; re-check whether it was enacted before publication. — COMAR regulations (10.12.01) were verified via Cornell LII rather than the official Maryland Division of State Documents (regs.maryland.gov); the content is the same but the official source should be cited. — The status of the Louisiana v. FDA litigation at the U.S. Supreme Court evolves rapidly. The research reflects the posture as of approximately May-June 2026..