Reaffirming the freedom to decide and expressing continued support for medication abortion access.
- Bill Number
- H.Res. 65
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Health
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-01-24: Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Last Updated
- 2026-04-07T21:02:49Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This House Resolution (H. Res. 65) aims to reaffirm individuals' freedom to make personal decisions about abortion and express ongoing support for access to medication abortion (a non-surgical method using drugs like mifepristone). It opposes efforts to misuse the Comstock Act—a 19th-century law originally aimed at prohibiting the mailing of obscene materials or items related to contraception or abortion—to restrict abortion nationwide.
Key Provisions
- Background Clauses ("Whereas"): The resolution outlines concerns, including:
- Attempts by anti-abortion groups to apply the outdated Comstock Act to ban abortion.
- A long-standing interpretation (supported by the Department of Justice, courts, and Congress) that the Comstock Act does not apply to lawful abortions.
- Public support for abortion access, with 80% of Americans opposing a federal ban.
- Broader threats to reproductive rights, including risks to shipping medical materials and overall sexual and reproductive health if the Act is misinterpreted.
- Resolved Actions: The House of Representatives:
- Affirms the current federal authority to distribute medication abortion, citing a 2022 Department of Justice memorandum that clarifies the Comstock Act (18 U.S.C. § 1461) does not prohibit mailing abortion drugs if the sender does not intend unlawful use by the recipient.
- Condemns any restrictions on access to or insurance coverage for reproductive health care, specifically including medication abortion like mifepristone.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
This is a non-binding resolution, so it introduces no direct changes to laws or statutes. Instead, it reinforces existing legal interpretations of the Comstock Act and federal protections for medication abortion distribution, without altering statutes or creating new enforceable rules.
Potential Impacts
- On Citizens: Could symbolically bolster public confidence in accessing medication abortion via mail or pharmacies, potentially reducing fears of federal interference in private health decisions. It highlights risks to broader reproductive health services if the Comstock Act is misused.
- On Government Agencies: May guide or reassure agencies like the U.S. Postal Service and Department of Justice in upholding current policies on mailing medical items, avoiding disruptions to legitimate health care shipping.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though it could signal U.S. domestic policy on reproductive rights, influencing perceptions among global health organizations or allies focused on women's health.
- Overall, the resolution serves as a statement of congressional intent, which might influence future regulations or court cases but lacks legal force.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Individuals Seeking Reproductive Health Care: Particularly women and those needing medication abortion, who could face access barriers if the Comstock Act is reinterpreted.
- Health Care Providers and Pharmacies: Entities distributing or prescribing abortion medications, potentially protected from federal overreach.
- Anti-Abortion Advocacy Groups: Directly opposed in the resolution's language, as it counters their efforts to expand the Comstock Act's application.
- Government Entities: Including the Department of Justice (for legal opinions), U.S. Postal Service (for mailing regulations), and Congress (for policy signaling).
- Insurers and Health Organizations: Affected by condemnations of coverage restrictions for reproductive services.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces a settled, century-old interpretation of the Comstock Act, potentially deterring challenges to medication abortion distribution. It cites specific DOJ guidance to support lawful mailing, which could be referenced in litigation (e.g., post-Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the 2022 Supreme Court case that ended federal abortion protections).
- Constitutional: Touches on privacy rights and personal autonomy in health decisions, echoing precedents like Roe v. Wade (overturned in Dobbs) by emphasizing freedom from undue federal interference in reproductive choices.
- Political: As an early 119th Congress measure (introduced January 24, 2025, by Rep. Gottheimer and referred to the Committees on Energy and Commerce and Judiciary), it highlights partisan divides on abortion post-Dobbs. It positions the House as supportive of access amid ongoing debates, possibly galvanizing pro-choice advocates while provoking opposition from anti-abortion factions, without binding outcomes.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Gottheimer, Josh [D-NJ-5]
Recent Actions
- 2025-01-24: Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2025-01-24: Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2025-01-24: Submitted in House
Bill Versions
- Reaffirming the freedom to decide and expressing continued support for medication abortion access. — issued 2025-01-24 — PDF (3 pages)