Black Americans are more likely than Americans of other races to live with chronic conditions like HIV. They also disproportionately struggle to afford the often expensive treatments needed to manage those conditions.

So it’s hardly surprising that Black voters care about politicians’ proposals to bring down healthcare costs more than any other group.

Most of those proposals — from leaders in both parties — are well-intentioned. But they are not all equally beneficial. Recent efforts to impose price controls on prescription drugs threaten to harm the very patients they are meant to help.

Consider former President Biden’s signature Inflation Reduction Act, which gave Medicare the power to set prices on brand-name medicines for chronic conditions like diabetes, autoimmune disease, or cancer — all diseases that Black patients disproportionately struggle with.

These price controls promise short-term cost savings. But they threaten to erase the much larger savings that patients with chronic illness would otherwise see over their lifetimes. That’s because price controls disincentivize companies from developing new medicines to compete against existing popular treatments for serious conditions.

Consider HIV. According to the CDC, more than 1.2 million people in the United States are living with HIV, and roughly 31,000 new infections still occur each year. In the 1980s, these diagnoses would have been a death sentence. Today, they represent a manageable chronic illness — a direct result of decades of sustained research and investment in antiretroviral development, long-acting injectables, and prevention tools like PrEP.

HIV treatments are cheaper and more accessible now than ever. That’s not because of government intervention, but because of the price wars that resulted as companies introduced competing therapies and battled for market share.

In fact, had the government prematurely intervened, those competing treatments might never have reached patients, who would still be stuck paying vastly higher prices.

That is precisely the risk our leaders are now taking. Many companies are already scaling back research because of the IRA’s price controls. Since the law’s passage in 2022, biotech firms have canceled at least 55 research programs.

That is especially dangerous for the Black community. Black patients have historically been overlooked by the research establishment, from the underrepresentation of Black participants in clinical trials to underinvestment in conditions like sickle cell disease that disproportionately affect Black patients. If companies are forced to scale back research, it is likely that treatments for smaller and more marginalized patient populations will face the greatest risks of being cut.

The Trump administration, meanwhile, continues to push for its so-called “Most Favored Nation” policy that would tie U.S. drug prices to the lower prices arbitrarily set by foreign governments.

The consequences could be severe. “Most Favored Nation” pricing would dramatically reduce companies’ revenues on both new and existing medicines, decimating resources for future research and development. Researchers project that, if imposed on Medicare and Medicaid alone, such policies could cut research spending nearly in half, leading to more than 200 fewer new medicines over the coming decade.

Developing treatments for HIV has historically required long timelines, complex trials, and sustained capital. Any policy that compresses revenues for breakthrough medicines must be evaluated not only for short-term savings, but also on its potential long-term effects on the pipeline that brings new survival and prevention advances to patients.

And there are also access risks. In countries that rely heavily on price controls, patients often face delayed and restricted access to drugs. Black communities in the United States already face barriers to consistent care and adherence to treatment. Importing foreign countries’ price controls would inevitably have ripple effects across our healthcare system, worsening these disparities.

Making healthcare more affordable is vitally important. Black families feel the pressure of rising costs every single day. But price controls carry severe tradeoffs. Breakthroughs in HIV treatment, long-acting prevention, cancer treatment, and chronic disease management rely on steady research — and if policymakers weaken the economic engine that drives that research, Black patients will feel the consequences first.

Health equity is not just about lowering today’s price tag. It is also about protecting tomorrow’s cures. Black communities deserve reforms that do both, not price controls that promise cost relief while sacrificing future breakthroughs.

Guy Anthony is president and CEO of Black, Gifted & Whole.

The Supreme Court on Monday blocked a California policy that allowed teachers to withhold information about a student’s gender identity from their parents.

The policy had permitted California students to explore their gender identity at school without that information automatically being disclosed to their parents. Now, educators in the state will be required to inform parents about developments related to a student’s gender identity, depending on how the case proceeds in lower courts.

The case involves two sets of parents — identified in court filings as John and Jane Poe and John and Jane Doe — both of which say their daughters began identifying as boys at school without their knowledge, citing religious objections to gender transitioning.

The Poes say they only learned about their daughter’s gender dysphoria after she attempted suicide in eighth grade and was hospitalized. After treatment for the attempt and after being returned to school the following year, teachers continued using a male name and pronouns despite the parents’ objections, citing California law. The Poes have since placed their daughter in therapy and psychiatric care.

Similarly, the Does say their daughter has intermittently identified as a boy since fifth grade, but while their daughter was in seventh grade, they confronted school administrators over concerns that staff were using a male name and pronouns without informing them. The principal told them state law barred disclosure without the child’s consent.

Both sets of parents filed lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California challenging the state policy that protects students’ gender identity and limits when schools can disclose that information to parents.

The justices voted along ideological lines, with the court’s six conservative members in the majority and the three liberal justices dissenting.

“We conclude that the parents who seek religious exemptions are likely to succeed on the merits of their Free Exercise Clause claim,” the court said in an unsigned order. “The parents who assert a free exercise claim have sincere religious beliefs about sex and gender, and they feel a religious obligation to raise their children in accordance with those beliefs. California’s policies violate those beliefs.”

In dissent, the three liberal justices argued that the case is still working its way through the lower courts and that there was no need for the high court to intervene at this stage. Justice Elena Kagan wrote, “If nothing else, this Court owes it to a sovereign State to avoid throwing over its policies in a slapdash way, if the Court can provide normal procedures. And throwing over a State’s policy is what the Court does today.”

Conservative Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas indicated they would have gone further and granted broader relief to the parents and teachers challenging the policy.

The emergency appeal from a group of teachers and parents in California followed a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that allowed the state’s policy to remain in effect. The appeals court had paused an order from U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez — who was nominated by George W. Bush — that sided with the parents and teachers and put the policy on hold.

The legal challenge was backed by the Thomas More Society, which relied heavily on a decision last year in which the court’s conservative majority sided with a group of religious parents seeking to opt their elementary school children out of engaging with LGBTQ-themed books in the classroom.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta expressed disappointment with the ruling. “We remain committed to ensuring a safe, welcoming school environment for all students while respecting the crucial role parents play in students’ lives,” his office said in a statement.

The decision comes as the Trump administration has taken a hardline approach to transgender rights. During his State of the Union address last week, President Donald Trump referenced Sage Blair, who previously identified as transgender and later detransitioned, describing Blair’s experience transitioning in a public school. According to the president, school employees supported Blair’s chosen gender identity and did not initially inform Blair’s parents.

Last year, the court upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors and has allowed enforcement of a policy barring transgender people from serving in the military to continue during Trump’s second term.

The Center for Black Equity held its 2026 DC Black Pride Theme Reveal event at Union Stage on Monday. The evening, a “Speakeasy Happy Hour,” was hosted by Anthony Oakes and featured performances by Lolita Leopard and Keith Angelo. The Center for Black Equity organizes DC Black Pride.

Kenya Hutton, Center for Black Equity president and CEO, spoke following the performances by Leopard and Angelo. Hutton announced this year’s theme for DC Black Pride: “New Black Renaissance.”

Performers for 2026 DC Black Pride were announced to be Bang Garcon, Be Steadwell, Jay Columbus, Bennu Byrd, Rue Pratt and Akeem Woods.

Singer-songwriter Durand Bernarr was announced as the headliner for the 2026 festivities. Bernerr gave brief remarks through a video played on the screen at the stage.

DC Black Pride is scheduled for May 22-25. For more information on DC Black Pride, visit dcblackpride.org.