Protecting Individuals with Down Syndrome Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Daines, Steve [R-MT]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jan 23, 2025
Bottom line
The bill criminalizes abortions based on a Down syndrome diagnosis, aiming to protect individuals with disabilities from discrimination while significantly restricting abortion access.
What it actually does
This bill amends Title 18 of the United States Code to prohibit abortions performed, in whole or in part, due to a diagnosis or suspicion that the unborn child has Down syndrome. It establishes criminal penalties for medical professionals who perform such abortions and civil remedies for affected parties. The bill also mandates reporting of violations and deems such abortions as discrimination under federal disability law, potentially leading to loss of federal funding for violators.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill upholds the inherent value and dignity of individuals with Down syndrome, consistent with federal policy protecting individuals with disabilities from discrimination. They contend that abortion based on a Down syndrome diagnosis constitutes invidious discrimination and that such practices have led to alarmingly high abortion rates for these diagnoses in other countries. The bill is seen as a necessary step to combat this form of discrimination and affirm the right to life for all, especially vulnerable populations.
Opponents contend
Opponents contend that the bill infringes upon a woman's reproductive autonomy and the right to make private medical decisions in consultation with her doctor. They argue that such legislation can create a chilling effect on prenatal testing and honest communication between patients and providers, potentially leading to less informed decisions. Critics also raise concerns about the federal government overreaching into medical practice and the potential for legal challenges based on established precedents regarding abortion access.
The bill is concise and relatively straightforward, allowing an informed reader to grasp its core provisions and implications within the time typically allotted for legislative review.
Section 3, Amending 18 U.S.C. Chapter 13, Section 251(b)
Prohibition on Discrimination by Abortion Based on Down Syndrome
This provision makes it unlawful to perform an abortion if the medical professional knows the woman is seeking it, in whole or in part, because the unborn child has or may have Down syndrome. It also requires medical professionals to ask about Down syndrome diagnoses and inform women of the prohibition if a diagnosis is known, before performing an abortion.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision directly addresses discrimination against individuals with Down syndrome, affirming their right to life and preventing selective abortion based on disability. They believe it aligns federal law with the principle of non-discrimination.
Critics contend
Opponents argue this provision interferes with a woman's right to make personal healthcare decisions and could lead to less comprehensive prenatal counseling, as medical professionals might fear legal repercussions for discussing diagnoses.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the protection of unborn children with disabilities against a pregnant woman's autonomy in reproductive healthcare decisions. It creates a tension between disability rights advocacy and abortion rights advocacy.
Section 3, Amending 18 U.S.C. Chapter 13, Section 251(c)
Criminal Penalties for Violations
Any person who violates or attempts to violate the prohibition on Down syndrome-based abortions, or related actions like coercion or fund solicitation, faces criminal penalties including fines under Title 18 and imprisonment for up to 5 years.
Section 3, Amending 18 U.S.C. Chapter 13, Section 251(d)
Civil Remedies for Affected Parties
This section allows women who undergo a coerced abortion, and in some cases, the father of the unborn child or a maternal grandparent (if the woman is a minor), to bring civil actions against those who violated the prohibition. Relief can include verifiable money damages for psychological and physical injuries, punitive damages, and injunctive relief to prevent future violations.
Section 3, Amending 18 U.S.C. Chapter 13, Section 251(f)
Loss of Federal Funding for Violations
A violation of the prohibition against Down syndrome-based abortions is explicitly deemed discrimination for the purposes of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. This means that entities found in violation could lose federal funding.
Section 3, Amending 18 U.S.C. Chapter 13, Section 251(g)
Mandatory Reporting Requirement
Physicians, physician's assistants, nurses, counselors, and other medical or mental health professionals are required to report known or suspected violations of this section to appropriate law enforcement authorities. Failure to report can result in a fine and imprisonment for up to 1 year.
Defines 'unborn child' as an individual of the species homo sapiens from the beginning of biological development, including fertilization, until being born alive.
Section 3, Amending 18 U.S.C. Chapter 13, Section 251(a)(4)
Why it matters:Defining key terms is standard legislative practice, but the specific breadth of this definition (from fertilization) is highly consequential and often debated.
Case for: Proponents argue this definition provides clear and comprehensive protection for human life from its earliest stages, aligning with the bill's intent to prevent discrimination against unborn children.
Case against: Opponents argue this broad definition of 'unborn child' has significant implications for reproductive rights beyond the scope of Down syndrome, potentially setting a precedent for personhood arguments from conception.
Estimated impact: This definition establishes the legal scope of protection for an 'unborn child' under this specific federal statute, impacting when the prohibition applies.
A woman upon whom an abortion is performed may not be prosecuted or held civilly liable for any violation of this section or for a conspiracy to violate this section.
Section 3, Amending 18 U.S.C. Chapter 13, Section 251(e)
Why it matters:This is a common legislative practice in abortion-related bills to ensure that the legal burden falls on providers and facilitators, not the pregnant woman, but its placement might obscure its importance.
Case for: Proponents argue this protects vulnerable women from additional legal burdens, ensuring that the focus of enforcement remains on those who perform or coerce the prohibited abortions.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against this provision, as it is generally accepted that the woman undergoing an abortion should not be criminalized.
Estimated impact: This provision clarifies that the criminal and civil penalties of the bill do not apply to the pregnant woman, preventing her from being a defendant in such cases.
Requires courts to make orders protecting the anonymity of any woman upon whom an abortion has been performed or attempted in civil or criminal actions under this section, unless she gives written consent for disclosure or compelling reasons require it. This includes sealing records and excluding individuals from courtrooms.
Section 3, Amending 18 U.S.C. Chapter 13, Section 251(i)
Why it matters:Privacy protections in sensitive legal matters are standard, but placing it after the main enforcement mechanisms means a casual reader might not immediately grasp its importance for affected individuals.
Case for: Proponents argue this ensures that women involved in these sensitive cases are protected from public scrutiny and potential harassment, encouraging them to come forward if they have been victims of coercion.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against privacy protections for individuals in court proceedings, though some might argue for greater transparency in certain contexts.
Estimated impact: This provision ensures the privacy and safety of women involved in legal proceedings under this Act, potentially reducing barriers to reporting violations or participating in civil actions.