Bill
S 687
Federal S. 687 requires states to quarterly report anonymized data on pregnant inmates to the Attorney General to improve custody medical care and oversight.
Note on materials provided
- The documents supplied include multiple, inconsistent texts labeled “S 687”:
1. A federal Senate bill introduced 2/24/2025 by Senators Jon Ossoff and John Kennedy titled the “Births in Custody Reporting Act of 2025” (primary text summarized below).
2. A Massachusetts Senate docket (Senate No. 687, filed 1/14/2025) concerning pharmacy network access and anti‑steering rules.
3. An unrelated title line referencing a “transitional pathway program for students … with autism spectrum disorder” and assorted committee referrals that do not match the federal bill text.
- This summary focuses on the federal S. 687 (Births in Custody Reporting Act of 2025), which is the most detailed set of legislative text provided. Brief notes on the Massachusetts bill follow.
Federal: Births in Custody Reporting Act of 2025 (S. 687)
- Purpose and intent
- To require States to collect and report anonymized, aggregate information about people who are pregnant or give birth while detained or incarcerated, and to use that data to improve medical care and oversight in jails, prisons, and related facilities.
- Key provisions
- Quarterly reporting: States that receive certain federal grant funds must submit quarterly, anonymized, aggregate reports to the Attorney General per DOJ guidelines.
- Covered facilities: Municipal/county jails, State prisons, boot camps (State or contracted), State/local contract facilities, and juvenile facilities.
- Required data elements (minimum):
- Total number of pregnant inmates in custody in the calendar year; race/ethnicity; quarter of admission and quarter of release or pregnancy outcome.
- Whether pregnancy testing occurred within 1 week of admission; whether a prenatal visit occurred within 7 days of pregnancy determination.
- Pregnancy outcomes while in custody (live birth, stillbirth, miscarriage, ectopic, maternal death, neonatal death, preterm birth) and whether the outcome occurred on- or off-site (with off-site location identified).
- Use of restraints: number of times, type, justification; whether used during pregnancy, labor, delivery, or transit; whether applied to ankles, wrists, abdomen.
- Postpartum care: number still in custody at least 12 weeks postpartum; whether screened for postpartum depression and whether seen by a qualified medical provider within 2 weeks after delivery.
- Restrictive housing: counts of pregnant or postpartum people placed in restrictive housing, reasons, and duration.
- Privacy: Reports must not include personally identifiable information.
- Compliance timeline and penalties:
- States have up to 120 days after enactment to begin complying; AG may grant an additional 120 days if a State is making good‑faith efforts.
- After the compliance period, noncompliant States may (at the AG’s discretion) face up to a 10% reduction in certain Byrne/Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act grant funds; withheld funds may be reallocated to compliant States.
- Transparency and study:
- The Attorney General must make submitted reports public.
- DOJ must study the reported information to identify improvements in care and examine relationships between custody and adverse outcomes (stillbirths, maternal/neonatal deaths, preterm births) and facility management.
- AG must report study findings to Congress within 2 years of enactment.
- Who is affected
- State corrections systems and local jails (data collection and reporting burden).
- Federal grant administrators (possible funding penalties).
- Incarcerated pregnant and postpartum people (policy and oversight implications).
- Public health and oversight entities (access to new aggregated data).
- Procedural status (from provided materials)
- Introduced in the U.S. Senate on February 24, 2025; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- A committee hearing was scheduled (listed as 06/10/2025 in the materials).
- Potential impacts
- Greater federal visibility into pregnancy-related outcomes in custody could drive policy/practice changes (medical screening/timeliness, limits on restraints, postpartum care, use of restrictive housing).
- Possible administrative costs for States to collect and report detailed, quarterly data.
- Financial incentive/penalty mechanism may accelerate compliance; public reporting could increase accountability.
Massachusetts Senate No. 687 (state-level, brief)
- Purpose: ensure access to “fair and reasonable pharmacy networks” and prohibit/penalize PBM “steering.”
- Key provisions:
- Adds definitions (network; “steering” by PBMs/carriers).
- Requires PBMs to maintain adequate, accessible pharmacy networks; prohibits denying a pharmacy preferred network status if it accepts standard terms; excludes mail-order pharmacies from network adequacy calculations.
- Imposes a 10% surcharge payable to the state division on the aggregate dollar amount reimbursed by a PBM (or by a health plan whose PBM engages in steering) in the prior calendar year.
- Status: Filed 1/14/2025 in the Massachusetts Senate (Financial Services committee).
Recommendation
- Confirm which jurisdiction and version you want summarized or tracked (federal S. 687 vs. Massachusetts S. 687 vs. the unrelated higher-education/autism title). I can produce a focused brief, bill text comparison, or stakeholder impact analysis for any of these.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
