Stealthing Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Torres, Norma J. [D-CA-35]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 29, 2025
Bottom line
This bill creates a new federal civil remedy for victims of stealthing, aiming to provide legal recourse and deter this form of sexual violence nationwide.
What it actually does
This bill establishes a federal civil cause of action for "non-consensual sexual protection barrier removal," commonly known as stealthing. It allows individuals who have experienced the non-consensual removal of a sexual protection barrier during sexual contact to sue the perpetrator for damages and injunctive relief, provided there is a connection to interstate commerce or federal jurisdiction.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that stealthing is a grave violation of autonomy, dignity, and trust, exposing victims to significant physical risks including pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. They contend that a federal civil action is essential to provide victims with a means to seek justice and compensation, building on state-level efforts like California's law, and to affirm individuals' fundamental right to make decisions about sexual protection barrier use.
Opponents contend
Potential opponents might argue that this issue is best addressed at the state level, as demonstrated by existing state laws, and that creating a federal civil action could lead to an overreach of federal jurisdiction into matters traditionally governed by state tort law. Concerns could also be raised regarding the practical difficulties of proving non-consensual removal in court, potentially leading to vexatious litigation or challenges in enforcement.
The bill is very short and easy to read, allowing ample time for comprehensive evaluation.
Section 3(a)
Establishes Federal Civil Action for Stealthing
This provision creates a new federal civil right, allowing any person to sue another who engages in non-consensual sexual protection barrier removal. This means if someone removes a sexual protection barrier (like a condom or dental dam) from a body part or object during sexual contact without the consent of all involved, and this leads to unprotected sexual contact, the victim can take legal action.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision empowers victims by giving them a legal avenue to seek justice and compensation for a deeply violating act that can have severe physical and emotional consequences. It acknowledges stealthing as a form of sexual violence and provides a deterrent against such behavior.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that proving non-consensual removal in a civil court could be challenging, potentially leading to vexatious litigation or difficulties in establishing intent. Some may also argue that such matters are better handled by state laws, which can be tailored to local contexts.
Tradeoffs
The bill balances the need to provide legal recourse for victims of sexual violence with potential challenges in legal proof and the scope of federal intervention in personal conduct.
Section 3(b)
Defines Federal Jurisdiction for Civil Action
This section outlines the specific conditions under which a federal court would have jurisdiction over a stealthing civil action. These conditions primarily involve a connection to interstate or foreign commerce, such as the defendant traveling across state lines, using interstate communication, or the sexual protection barrier itself having moved in interstate commerce. It also includes acts within federal territories or that otherwise affect interstate commerce.
Section 3(c)
Specifies Damages and Relief Available
This subsection details the types of relief a person can seek if they successfully bring a civil action under this Act. These include compensatory damages (to cover actual losses), punitive damages (to punish the wrongdoer), injunctive relief (court orders to stop certain actions), declaratory relief (a court's official statement of rights), and any other relief the court deems appropriate.