Chloe Cole Act of 2026

Bill Number

H.R. 7651

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 2

Policy Area

Health

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2026-02-23: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Last Updated

2026-07-10T08:05:47Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The Chloe Cole Act of 2026 aims to create a federal legal pathway for children (individuals under 18) and their parents or guardians to sue medical professionals, hospitals, or clinics for damages if "healthy body parts" of the child are harmed through specific medical interventions. These interventions primarily target treatments intended to delay puberty, alter physical appearance, or change biological functions to align with a gender identity different from the child's biological sex. The law does not ban these practices but holds providers accountable through civil lawsuits.

Key Provisions

• Definitions:
• Child: Any person under 18 years old.
• Covered Interventions: Medical actions using puberty blockers (e.g., hormone agonists/antagonists), sex hormones (e.g., estrogen, testosterone, or blockers), or surgeries that aim to delay, halt, or disrupt natural puberty/development or change the body's appearance/functions to not match the individual's biological sex (defined as male or female based on reproductive gametes—sperm for male, ova for female—determined at conception).
• Exclusions: Does not apply to treatments for verifiable disorders of sexual development (e.g., chromosomal conditions like 46 XX with virilization), complications from prior interventions, or necessary care for injuries, congenital anomalies, or life-threatening illnesses.
• Detransition Treatment: Any medical steps to stop, reverse, or recover from effects of a prior covered intervention.
• Participate: Includes prescribing, administering, performing, authorizing, or coordinating these interventions with the intent to alter sex characteristics.
• Health Care Professional: Licensed providers (e.g., doctors) authorized to give medical care.

• Private Right of Action (Section 3):
• Children (or their parents/guardians) can file civil lawsuits in U.S. district courts against any participating health care professional, hospital, or clinic for damages.
• Applies to interventions before, on, or after the law's enactment.
• Damages Available:
• Compensatory: Covers economic costs to fix, undo, or ease effects (e.g., detransition treatments).
• Non-economic: For emotional distress, pain, and suffering.
• Punitive: Awarded if proven by "clear and convincing evidence" (a higher standard than usual proof) that the defendant acted maliciously, intentionally, fraudulently, or recklessly.
• Strict Liability: Post-enactment, providers are automatically liable if involvement is proven by clear and convincing evidence; defendants must prove any exclusion applies.
• Federal Jurisdiction: Cases qualify for federal courts if linked to interstate or foreign commerce (e.g., travel, payments, communications, or tools crossing state lines; or if occurring in D.C., U.S. territories).

• Rules of Construction (Section 4):
• Liability cannot be waived (e.g., no release forms can block lawsuits).
• Ambiguities in the law are interpreted against those who performed the intervention.
• For pre-enactment cases, courts give limited weight to "standards of care" (common medical practices) if they were scientifically disputed and the provider knew or should have known.
• Providers can still discuss treatment options, risks, benefits, or opinions without liability, as long as it doesn't involve participating in a covered intervention.

• Statute of Limitations (Section 5): Lawsuits can be filed up to 25 years after the child's 18th birthday or within 4 years of incurring detransition treatment costs, whichever is later (longer than typical medical malpractice timelines).

• Severability (Section 6): If any part is ruled unconstitutional, the rest remains in effect.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Introduces a new federal "private right of action" (a legal tool allowing individuals to sue directly in court without relying on government enforcement), which did not previously exist specifically for these interventions on minors.
• Imposes strict liability (automatic responsibility without proving negligence) for post-enactment cases, shifting the burden to defendants—uncommon in medical malpractice, where plaintiffs usually must show care fell below accepted standards.
• Overrides some state laws by allowing federal lawsuits nationwide, with limited deference to disputed medical standards.
• Extends timelines for filing claims far beyond standard statutes of limitations (often 2-3 years), enabling suits for long-term harms.

Potential Impacts

• On Citizens: Empowers minors and families to seek financial compensation for physical, emotional, or corrective harms from these interventions, potentially increasing access to justice for those regretting treatments (e.g., "detransitioners"). It may deter families from pursuing such care due to liability fears.
• On Government Agencies: Minimal direct impact; federal courts will handle increased caseloads, but no new agencies or funding are created. Could indirectly affect state health departments if lawsuits challenge local regulations.
• On Medical Providers and Institutions: Raises risks for health care professionals, hospitals, and clinics offering gender-related care to minors, possibly leading to reduced services, higher insurance costs, or clinic closures in some states. Encourages caution in prescribing or performing these treatments.
• On International Relations: Limited; applies to U.S.-based providers but could affect cases involving travel abroad for care if tied to interstate commerce.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Children and Families: Primary beneficiaries, including minors who received interventions and their parents/guardians, who gain lawsuit rights.
• Health Care Professionals: Doctors, nurses, and others who prescribe, administer, or authorize covered treatments face heightened liability.
• Hospitals and Clinics: Institutions providing these services could see financial and operational burdens from lawsuits.
• Detransitioners: Adults who underwent childhood interventions may pursue claims for reversal costs.
• Advocacy Groups: Organizations supporting or opposing gender-affirming care for minors (e.g., transgender rights vs. child protection advocates) will likely engage in legal challenges or defenses.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Relies on the Commerce Clause (U.S. Constitution Article I, Section 8) to establish federal jurisdiction, broadening court reach into medical practices traditionally regulated by states. The strict liability and burden-shifting rules could set precedents for other liability laws, while the long statute of limitations may face challenges for fairness.
• Constitutional: The biological definition of "sex" aligns with some interpretations of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause but could conflict with emerging rights under cases like Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), which extended protections based on gender identity. Severability ensures partial survival if struck down (e.g., for infringing free speech in medical advice or due process in liability standards).
• Political: Sparks debate on balancing child protection from irreversible procedures against access to gender-affirming care, potentially influencing state laws (some already restrict such treatments for minors). As a federal measure, it may preempt varying state policies, heightening national divisions without directly banning practices.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Onder, Robert F. [R-MO-3]

Cosponsors (76)

Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3], Rep. Rose, John W. [R-TN-6], Rep. Nehls, Troy E. [R-TX-22], Rep. Harris, Andy [R-MD-1], Rep. Aderholt, Robert B. [R-AL-4], Rep. Moore, Barry [R-AL-1], Rep. Jack, Brian [R-GA-3], Rep. DesJarlais, Scott [R-TN-4], Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17], Rep. Simpson, Michael K. [R-ID-2], Rep. Downing, Troy [R-MT-2], Rep. Biggs, Sheri [R-SC-3], Rep. Webster, Daniel [R-FL-11], Rep. Timmons, William R. [R-SC-4], Rep. Harrigan, Pat [R-NC-10], Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3], Rep. Harshbarger, Diana [R-TN-1], Rep. Messmer, Mark B. [R-IN-8], Rep. Stutzman, Marlin A. [R-IN-3], Rep. Collins, Mike [R-GA-10], Rep. Hunt, Wesley [R-TX-38], Rep. Self, Keith [R-TX-3], Rep. McGuire, John J. [R-VA-5], Rep. Ogles, Andrew [R-TN-5], Rep. Palmer, Gary J. [R-AL-6], Rep. Hageman, Harriet M. [R-WY-At Large], Rep. McCormick, Richard [R-GA-7], Rep. Houchin, Erin [R-IN-9], Rep. Stauber, Pete [R-MN-8], Rep. Finstad, Brad [R-MN-1], Rep. Weber, Randy K. Sr. [R-TX-14], Rep. Taylor, David J. [R-OH-2], Rep. Miller, Mary E. [R-IL-15], Rep. Moore, Blake D. [R-UT-1], Rep. Cloud, Michael [R-TX-27], Rep. Burlison, Eric [R-MO-7], Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4], Rep. Mann, Tracey [R-KS-1], Rep. McDowell, Addison P. [R-NC-6], Rep. Kustoff, David [R-TN-8], Rep. Moore, Tim [R-NC-14], Rep. Donalds, Byron [R-FL-19], Rep. Bost, Mike [R-IL-12], Rep. Roy, Chip [R-TX-21], Rep. Griffith, H. Morgan [R-VA-9], Rep. Flood, Mike [R-NE-1], Rep. Gill, Brandon [R-TX-26], Rep. Mace, Nancy [R-SC-1], Rep. Babin, Brian [R-TX-36], Rep. Cline, Ben [R-VA-6] and 26 more

Recent Actions

• 2026-02-23: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
• 2026-02-23: Introduced in House
• 2026-02-23: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Chloe Cole Act of 2026 — issued 2026-02-23 — PDF (11 pages)