Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
The bill makes it unlawful for persons or organizations engaged in interstate commerce or accepting federal funds to perform or assist abortions for unemancipated minors under 18 unless parents are notified in writing, a 96-hour waiting period elapses, and any related court injunctions are followed. Notification must be personal delivery or certified mail with restricted delivery; a court may waive notification only for clear and convincing evidence of physical abuse.
Progressives emphasize harms to minors and chilling of providers
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill sets out a clear substantive policy change with defined duties, exceptions, and sanctions, but it provides only partial operational detail necessary for consistent implementation and oversight.
The bill makes it unlawful for persons or organizations engaged in interstate commerce or accepting federal funds to perform or assist abortions for unemancipated minors under 18 unless parents are notified in writing, a 96-hour waiting period elapses, and any related court injunctions are followed.
Notification must be personal delivery or certified mail with restricted delivery; a court may waive notification only for clear and convincing evidence of physical abuse.
A non‑responsible physician may authorize an emergency exception with written certification.
High controversy, federalization of a sensitive issue, strong litigation risk, and few compromise features reduce enactment probability.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill sets out a clear substantive policy change with defined duties, exceptions, and sanctions, but it provides only partial operational detail necessary for consistent implementation and oversight.
Progressives emphasize harms to minors and chilling of providers
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize harms to minors and chilling of providers
This persona would likely oppose the bill as a federal restriction that limits minors' confidential access to abortion and criminalizes providers.
They would view judicial waiver and emergency exceptions as too narrow and likely to delay or block care, especially for minors in abusive situations.
This persona would have mixed views: they see value in parental involvement but are concerned about criminal penalties, federal intrusion, and procedural delays.
They would weigh parental rights against timely medical access and legal clarity.
This persona would likely support the bill for strengthening parental rights and allowing parents to block abortions for unemancipated minors.
They would view the enforcement tools and penalties as appropriate deterrents against circumventing parental involvement.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
High controversy, federalization of a sensitive issue, strong litigation risk, and few compromise features reduce enactment probability.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize harms to minors and chilling of providers
High controversy, federalization of a sensitive issue, strong litigation risk, and few compromise features reduce enactment probability.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill sets out a clear substantive policy change with defined duties, exceptions, and sanctions, but it provides only partial operational detail necessary for consistent im…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.