I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 147 

To prohibit discrimination against the unborn on the basis of sex or race, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2017 

Mr. FRANKS of Arizona introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prohibit discrimination against the unborn on the basis 

of sex or race, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Prenatal Non5 discrimination Act (PRENDA) of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY. 

7 (a) FINDINGS.—The Congress makes the following 

8 findings: 

9 (1) SEX DISCRIMINATION FINDINGS.— 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 147 IH

1 (A) Women are a vital part of American 

2 society and culture and possess the same funda3 mental human rights and civil rights as men. 

4 (B) United States law prohibits the dis5 similar treatment of males and females who are 

6 similarly situated and prohibits sex discrimina7 tion in various contexts, including the provision 

8 of employment, education, housing, health in9 surance coverage, and athletics. 

10 (C) Sex is an immutable characteristic as11 certainable at the earliest stages of human de12 velopment through existing medical technology 

13 and procedures commonly in use, including ma14 ternal-fetal bloodstream DNA sampling, 

15 amniocentesis, chorionic villus sampling or 

16 ‘‘CVS’’, and obstetric ultrasound. In addition to 

17 medically assisted sex determination, a growing 

18 sex-determination niche industry has developed 

19 and is marketing low-cost commercial products, 

20 widely advertised and available, that aid in the 

21 sex determination of an unborn child without 

22 the aid of medical professionals. Experts have 

23 demonstrated that the sex-selection industry is 

24 on the rise and predict that sex selection will 

25 continue to be a growing trend in the United 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 147 IH

1 States. Sex determination is always a necessary 

2 step to the procurement of a sex-selection abor3 tion. 

4 (D) A ‘‘sex-selection abortion’’ is an abor5 tion undertaken for purposes of eliminating an 

6 unborn child of an undesired sex. Sex-selection 

7 abortion is barbaric, and described by scholars 

8 and civil rights advocates as an act of sex-based 

9 or gender-based violence, predicated on sex dis10 crimination. Sex-selection abortions are typi11 cally late-term abortions performed in the 2d or 

12 3rd trimester of pregnancy, often after the un13 born child has developed sufficiently to feel 

14 pain. Substantial medical evidence proves that 

15 an unborn child can experience pain at 20 

16 weeks after conception, and perhaps substan17 tially earlier. By definition, sex-selection abor18 tions do not implicate the health of the mother 

19 of the unborn, but instead are elective proce20 dures motivated by sex or gender bias. 

21 (E) The targeted victims of sex-selection 

22 abortions performed in the United States and 

23 worldwide are overwhelmingly female. The se24 lective abortion of females is female infanticide, 

25 the intentional killing of unborn females, due to 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
4 

•HR 147 IH

1 the preference for male offspring or ‘‘son pref2 erence’’. Son preference is reinforced by the low 

3 value associated, by some segments of the world 

4 community, with female offspring. Those seg5 ments tend to regard female offspring as finan6 cial burdens to a family over their lifetime due 

7 to their perceived inability to earn or provide fi8 nancially for the family unit as can a male. In 

9 addition, due to social and legal convention, fe10 male offspring are less likely to carry on the 

11 family name. ‘‘Son preference’’ is one of the 

12 most evident manifestations of sex or gender 

13 discrimination in any society, undermining fe14 male equality, and fueling the elimination of fe15 males’ right to exist in instances of sex-selection 

16 abortion. 

17 (F) Sex-selection abortions are not ex18 pressly prohibited by United States law or the 

19 laws of 46 States. Sex-selection abortions are 

20 performed in the United States. In a March 

21 2008 report published in the Proceedings of the 

22 National Academy of Sciences, Columbia Uni23 versity economists Douglas Almond and Lena 

24 Edlund examined the sex ratio of United 

25 States-born children and found ‘‘evidence of sex 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
5 

•HR 147 IH

1 selection, most likely at the prenatal stage’’. 

2 The data revealed obvious ‘‘son preference’’ in 

3 the form of unnatural sex-ratio imbalances 

4 within certain segments of the United States 

5 population, primarily those segments tracing 

6 their origins to countries where sex-selection 

7 abortion is prevalent. The evidence strongly 

8 suggests that some Americans are exercising 

9 sex-selection abortion practices within the 

10 United States consistent with discriminatory 

11 practices common to their country of origin, or 

12 the country to which they trace their ancestry. 

13 While sex-selection abortions are more common 

14 outside the United States, the evidence reveals 

15 that female feticide is also occurring in the 

16 United States. 

17 (G) The American public supports a prohi18 bition of sex-selection abortion. In a March 

19 2006 Zogby International poll, 86 percent of 

20 Americans agreed that sex-selection abortion 

21 should be illegal, yet only eight States proscribe 

22 sex-selection abortion. In a 2012 poll conducted 

23 by the Charlotte Lozier Institute, 77 percent of 

24 Americans agreed that sex-selection abortion 

25 should be illegal. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
6 

•HR 147 IH

1 (H) Despite the failure of the United 

2 States to proscribe sex-selection abortion, the 

3 United States Congress has expressed repeat4 edly, through Congressional resolution, strong 

5 condemnation of policies promoting sex-selec6 tion abortion in the ‘‘Communist Government 

7 of China’’. Likewise, at the 2007 United Na8 tion’s Annual Meeting of the Commission on 

9 the Status of Women, 51st Session, the United 

10 States delegation spearheaded a resolution call11 ing on countries to condemn sex-selective abor12 tion, a policy directly contradictory to the per13 missiveness of current United States law, which 

14 places no restriction on the practice of sex-se15 lection abortion. The United Nations Commis16 sion on the Status of Women has urged govern17 ments of all nations ‘‘to take necessary meas18 ures to prevent . . . prenatal sex selection’’. 

19 (I) A 1990 report by Harvard University 

20 economist Amartya Sen, estimated that more 

21 than 100 million women were ‘‘demographically 

22 missing’’ from the world as early as 1990 due 

23 to sexist practices, including sex-selection abor24 tion. Many experts believe sex-selection abortion 

25 is the primary cause. More recent estimates of 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
7 

•HR 147 IH

1 women missing from the world range in the 

2 hundreds of millions. 

3 (J) Countries with longstanding experience 

4 with sex-selection abortion—such as the Repub5 lic of India, the United Kingdom, and the Peo6 ple’s Republic of China—have enacted restric7 tions on sex selection, and have steadily contin8 ued to strengthen prohibitions and penalties. 

9 The United States, by contrast, has no law in 

10 place to restrict sex-selection abortion, estab11 lishing the United States as affording less pro12 tection from sex-based feticide than the Repub13 lic of India or the People’s Republic of China, 

14 whose recent practices of sex-selection abortion 

15 were vehemently and repeatedly condemned by 

16 United States congressional resolution and by 

17 the United States Ambassador to the Commis18 sion on the Status of Women. Public state19 ments from within the medical community re20 veal that citizens of other countries come to the 

21 United States for sex-selection procedures that 

22 would be criminal in their country of origin. Be23 cause the United States permits abortion on the 

24 basis of sex, the United States may effectively 

25 function as a ‘‘safe haven’’ for those who seek 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
8 

•HR 147 IH

1 to have American physicians do what would 

2 otherwise be criminal in their home countries— 

3 a sex-selection abortion, most likely late-term. 

4 (K) The American medical community op5 poses sex selection. The American Congress of 

6 Obstetricians and Gynecologists (‘‘ACOG’’) 

7 stated in its 2007 Ethics Committee Opinion, 

8 Number 360, that sex selection is inappropriate 

9 because it ‘‘ultimately supports sexist prac10 tices’’. The American Society of Reproductive 

11 Medicine (‘‘ASRM’’) published a 2004 Ethics 

12 Committee Opinion, noting that central to the 

13 controversy of sex selection in the use of as14 sisted reproductive technology (‘‘ART’’) is the 

15 potential for ‘‘inherent gender discrimination’’, 

16 . . . the ‘‘risk of psychological harm to sex-se17 lected offspring (i.e., by placing on them expec18 tations that are too high)’’, . . . and ‘‘rein19 forcement of gender bias in society as a whole’’. 

20 Sex selection in ART remains ‘‘vulnerable to 

21 the judgment that no matter what its basis, 

22 [the method] identifies gender as a reason to 

23 value one person over another, and it supports 

24 socially constructed stereotypes of what gender 

25 means’’. In doing so, it not only ‘‘reinforces 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
9 

•HR 147 IH

1 possibilities of unfair discrimination, but may 

2 trivialize human reproduction by making it de3 pend on the selection of nonessential features of 

4 offspring’’. The ASRM ethics opinion continues, 

5 ‘‘ongoing problems with the status of women in 

6 the United States make it necessary to take ac7 count of concerns for the impact of sex-selection 

8 on goals of gender equality’’. The American As9 sociation of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gyne10 cologists, an organization with hundreds of 

11 members—many of whom are former abortion12 ists—makes the following declaration: ‘‘Sex se13 lection abortions are more graphic examples of 

14 the damage that abortion inflicts on women. In 

15 addition to increasing premature labor in subse16 quent pregnancies, increasing suicide and major 

17 depression, and increasing the risk of breast 

18 cancer in teens who abort their first pregnancy 

19 and delay childbearing, sex selection abortions 

20 are often targeted at fetuses simply because the 

21 fetus is female. As physicians who care for both 

22 the mother and her unborn child, the American 

23 Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gyne24 cologists vigorously opposes aborting fetuses be25 cause of their gender.’’. The President’s Council 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
10 

•HR 147 IH

1 on Bioethics published a Working Paper stating 

2 the council’s belief that society’s respect for re3 productive freedom does not prohibit the regu4 lation or prohibition of ‘‘sex control’’, defined as 

5 the use of various medical technologies to 

6 choose the sex of one’s child. The publication 

7 expresses concern that ‘‘sex control might lead 

8 to . . . dehumanization and a new eugenics’’. 

9 (L)(i) Sex-selection abortions are often co10 erced, and therefore, the opposite of ‘‘choice’’. 

11 Researchers at the University of California at 

12 Berkeley and the University of California at 

13 San Francisco completed a study of Indian14 American women who had undergone sex-selec15 tion abortions in the United States. The study 

16 found that sex-selection abortions are often the 

17 product of violent coercion. 

18 (ii) Women who carried a female unborn 

19 child to term said they were subject to varying 

20 degrees of verbal and physical abuse, which 

21 may be to the point of actually inducing a sex22 selection abortion. A woman may be denied 

23 food, water, and rest to induce an abortion 

24 where the family determines that the woman is 

25 carrying a female unborn child. Some women 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
11 

•HR 147 IH

1 described being hit, pushed, choked and kicked 

2 in the abdomen in a husband’s attempt to forc3 ibly terminate a female unborn child. Preg4 nancy is already a vulnerable time for women; 

5 the most common cause of death for pregnant 

6 women in the United States is homicide, often 

7 at the hands of the unborn child’s father. 

8 (iii) The study concluded that sex selection 

9 can be the product of an abusive environment 

10 created by marital partners, an extended fam11 ily, or both. One-third of the women in the 

12 study reported that a history of family violence 

13 exacerbated when they did not give birth to a 

14 son. Notably, because the researchers had rea15 son to fear for the participants’ exposure to 

16 marital violence, all subjects received informa17 tion on local South Asian women’s organiza18 tions offering assistance for victims of family vi19 olence. The failure to bear a son is a serious 

20 matter; the birth of a daughter could result in 

21 violence or a brutal death for the mother at the 

22 hands of the father and mother-in-law. For ex23 ample, photojournalist Walter Astrada’s re24 nowned documentary tells the story of an In25 dian woman who was tortured and abandoned 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
12 

•HR 147 IH

1 by her husband and mother-in-law for refusing 

2 to abort twin girls. Sex-selection abortion has 

3 long been considered a form of violence against 

4 women, and the study proved that both the 

5 women and the unborn daughter are victims of 

6 violence where sex-selection abortion is legally 

7 available but not sought by the mother. Forty 

8 percent of the women had terminated prior 

9 pregnancies when they learned that the unborn 

10 child was female. Of the women who discovered 

11 they were pregnant with a girl during the inter12 view period, 89 percent underwent a sex-selec13 tion abortion. Among those that did not abort 

14 their unborn daughters, 100 percent expressed 

15 ambivalence about prior sex-selection abortions. 

16 Further, 100 percent cited physical and psycho17 logical trauma from the past abortions as rea18 sons for not seeking another. Most tragically, 

19 100 percent expressed guilt, shame and sadness 

20 over their inability to ‘‘save’’ the daughters they 

21 had aborted. 

22 (iv) Coercive sex-selection abortions are 

23 suspected in other western countries as well. 

24 Following a 2012 investigation of sex-selection 

25 abortion in the United Kingdom, Dr. Tony FalVerDate Sep 11 2014 21:39 Jan 09, 2017 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H147.IH H147

sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
13 

•HR 147 IH

1 coner, President of the Royal College of Obstet2 rics and Gynaecology, raised the specter that 

3 women may be experiencing violence and coer4 cion to force sex-selection abortions. 

5 (v) A growing body of research documents 

6 the relationship between intimate partner vio7 lence and reproductive coercion. 

8 (M) Sex-selection abortion harms women. 

9 Researchers at the University of California 

10 found that women in the United States who un11 dergo sex-selection abortions are at increased 

12 risk for psychological and physical morbidity, 

13 documented by their descriptions of depression, 

14 anxiety, chronic pain, physical abuse, closely 

15 spaced pregnancies, and ‘‘forced abortions’’. 

16 Further, 100 percent of the study participants 

17 who chose to carry unborn baby girls cited 

18 physical and psychological trauma from past 

19 abortions as reasons for not seeking another. 

20 Similarly, Indian-Canadian counselor, Aruna 

21 Papp, stated publicly that in her 30 years of ex22 perience treating Indian-Canadian women, she 

23 has found that sex-selection abortion is the 

24 leading cause of mental illness among women in 

25 the Punjabi Health Services, Peel region, and 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
14 

•HR 147 IH

1 the leading cause of depression and attempted 

2 suicide in the South Asian Settlement Services 

3 in Scarborough. Some of Papp’s patients ob4 tained their sex-selection abortions in Michigan 

5 and New York. Papp also reports ‘‘many other 

6 physical ailments that are related to two, three, 

7 or four abortions’’. 

8 (N) Sex-selection abortion results in an un9 natural sex-ratio imbalance. An unnatural sex10 ratio imbalance is undesirable, due to the in11 ability of the numerically predominant sex to 

12 find mates. Experts worldwide document that a 

13 significant sex-ratio imbalance in which males 

14 numerically predominate can be a cause of in15 creased violence and militancy within a society. 

16 Likewise, an unnatural sex-ratio imbalance 

17 gives rise to the commoditization of humans in 

18 the form of human trafficking, and a con19 sequent increase in kidnapping and other vio20 lent crime. 

21 (O) Sex-selection abortions have the effect 

22 of diminishing the representation of women in 

23 the American population, and therefore, the 

24 American electorate. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
15 

•HR 147 IH

1 (P) Sex-selection abortion reinforces sex 

2 discrimination and has no place in a civilized 

3 society. 

4 (2) RACIAL DISCRIMINATION FINDINGS.— 

5 (A) Minorities are a vital part of American 

6 society and culture and possess the same funda7 mental human rights and civil rights as the ma8 jority. 

9 (B) United States law prohibits discrimi10 nation on the basis of race in various contexts, 

11 including employment, education, housing, 

12 health insurance coverage, and athletics. 

13 (C) A ‘‘race-selection abortion’’ is an abor14 tion performed for purposes of eliminating an 

15 unborn child because the child or a parent of 

16 the child is of an undesired race. Race-selection 

17 abortion is barbaric, and described by civil 

18 rights advocates as an act of race-based vio19 lence, predicated on race discrimination. By 

20 definition, race-selection abortions do not impli21 cate the health of mother of the unborn, but in22 stead are elective procedures motivated by race 

23 bias. 

24 (D) A thorough review of the history of the 

25 American population control movement and its 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
16 

•HR 147 IH

1 close affiliation with the American Eugenics So2 ciety reveals a history of targeting certain racial 

3 or ethnic groups for ‘‘family planning’’. This 

4 history likely contributes to the current statistic 

5 that a Black baby is five times as likely to be 

6 aborted as a White baby, often in a federally 

7 subsidized clinic. 

8 (E) Abortion is the leading cause of death 

9 in the Black community. With approximately 

10 450,000 Black abortions per year, more Black 

11 Americans lose their lives each year to abortion 

12 than to cancer, heart disease, diabetes, AIDS, 

13 and violence combined. These statistics are de14 rived by comparing the abortion statistics of the 

15 Alan Guttmacher Institute (formerly the re16 search arm of Planned Parenthood) to the Na17 tional Vital Statistics annual reports showing 

18 the number of deaths by cause and race. The 

19 numbers for each of these variables have re20 mained relatively constant from year to year, 

21 since 2005. 

22 (F) Only one State, Arizona, has enacted 

23 law to proscribe the performance of race-selec24 tion abortions. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
17 

•HR 147 IH

1 (G) Race-selection abortions have the ef2 fect of diminishing the number of minorities in 

3 the American population and therefore, the 

4 American electorate. 

5 (H) Race-selection abortion reinforces ra6 cial discrimination and has no place in a civ7 ilized society. 

8 (3) GENERAL FINDINGS.— 

9 (A) The history of the United States in10 cludes examples of both sex discrimination and 

11 race discrimination. The people of the United 

12 States ultimately responded in the strongest 

13 possible legal terms by enacting constitutional 

14 amendments correcting elements of such dis15 crimination. Women, once subjected to sex dis16 crimination that denied them the right to vote, 

17 now have suffrage guaranteed by the 19th 

18 Amendment. African-Americans, once subjected 

19 to race discrimination through slavery that de20 nied them equal protection of the laws, now 

21 have that right guaranteed by the 14th Amend22 ment. The elimination of discriminatory prac23 tices has been and is among the highest prior24 ities and greatest achievements of American 

25 history. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
18 

•HR 147 IH

1 (B) Implicitly approving the discriminatory 

2 practices of sex-selection abortion and race-se3 lection abortion by choosing not to prohibit 

4 them will reinforce these inherently discrimina5 tory practices, and evidence a failure to protect 

6 a segment of certain unborn Americans because 

7 those unborn are of a sex or racial makeup that 

8 is disfavored. Sex-selection and race-selection 

9 abortions trivialize the value of the unborn on 

10 the basis of sex or race, reinforcing sex and 

11 race discrimination, and coarsening society to 

12 the humanity of all vulnerable and innocent 

13 human life, making it increasingly difficult to 

14 protect such life. Thus, Congress has a compel15 ling interest in acting—indeed it must act—to 

16 prohibit sex-selection abortion and race-selec17 tion abortion. 

18 (b) CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY.—In accordance 

19 with the above findings, Congress enacts the following 

20 pursuant to Congress’ power under— 

21 (1) the Commerce Clause; 

22 (2) section 2 of the 13th Amendment; 

23 (3) section 5 of the 14th Amendment, including 

24 the power to enforce the prohibition on government 

25 action denying equal protection of the laws; and 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
19 

•HR 147 IH

1 (4) section 8 of article I to make all laws nec2 essary and proper for the carrying into execution of 

3 powers vested by the Constitution in the Govern4 ment of the United States. 

5 SEC. 3. DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE UNBORN ON THE 

6 BASIS OF RACE OR SEX. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 13 of title 18, United 

8 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol9 lowing: 

10 ‘‘§ 250. Discrimination against the unborn on the 

11 basis of race or sex 

12 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Whoever knowingly— 

13 ‘‘(1) performs an abortion knowing that such 

14 abortion is sought based on the sex, gender, color or 

15 race of the child, or the race of a parent of that 

16 child; 

17 ‘‘(2) uses force or the threat of force to inten18 tionally injure or intimidate any person for the pur19 pose of coercing a sex-selection or race-selection 

20 abortion; 

21 ‘‘(3) solicits or accepts funds for the perform22 ance of a sex-selection abortion or a race-selection 

23 abortion; or 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
20 

•HR 147 IH

1 ‘‘(4) transports a woman into the United States 

2 or across a State line for the purpose of obtaining 

3 a sex-selection abortion or race-selection abortion, 

4 or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or im5 prisoned not more than 5 years, or both. 

6 ‘‘(b) CIVIL REMEDIES.— 

7 ‘‘(1) CIVIL ACTION BY WOMAN ON WHOM ABOR8 TION IS PERFORMED.—A woman upon whom an 

9 abortion has been performed or attempted in viola10 tion of subsection (a)(2) may in a civil action 

11 against any person who engaged in a violation of 

12 subsection (a) obtain appropriate relief. 

13 ‘‘(2) CIVIL ACTION BY RELATIVES.—The father 

14 of an unborn child who is the subject of an abortion 

15 performed or attempted in violation of subsection 

16 (a), or a maternal grandparent of the unborn child 

17 if the pregnant woman is an unemancipated minor, 

18 may in a civil action against any person who en19 gaged in the violation, obtain appropriate relief, un20 less the pregnancy or abortion resulted from the 

21 plaintiff’s criminal conduct or the plaintiff consented 

22 to the abortion. 

23 ‘‘(3) APPROPRIATE RELIEF.—Appropriate relief 

24 in a civil action under this subsection includes— 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
21 

•HR 147 IH

1 ‘‘(A) objectively verifiable money damages 

2 for all injuries, psychological and physical, in3 cluding loss of companionship and support, oc4 casioned by the violation of this section; and 

5 ‘‘(B) punitive damages. 

6 ‘‘(4) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.— 

7 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—A qualified plaintiff 

8 may in a civil action obtain injunctive relief to 

9 prevent an abortion provider from performing 

10 or attempting further abortions in violation of 

11 this section. 

12 ‘‘(B) DEFINITION.—In this paragraph the 

13 term ‘qualified plaintiff’ means— 

14 ‘‘(i) a woman upon whom an abortion 

15 is performed or attempted in violation of 

16 this section; 

17 ‘‘(ii) a maternal grandparent of the 

18 unborn child if the woman upon whom an 

19 abortion is performed or attempted in vio20 lation of this section is an unemancipated 

21 minor; 

22 ‘‘(iii) the father of an unborn child 

23 who is the subject of an abortion per24 formed or attempted in violation of sub25 section (a); or 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
22 

•HR 147 IH

1 ‘‘(iv) the Attorney General. 

2 ‘‘(5) ATTORNEYS FEES FOR PLAINTIFF.—The 

3 court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee as part 

4 of the costs to a prevailing plaintiff in a civil action 

5 under this subsection. 

6 ‘‘(c) EXCEPTION.—A woman upon whom a sex-selec7 tion or race-selection abortion is performed may not be 

8 prosecuted or held civilly liable for any violation of this 

9 section, or for a conspiracy to violate this section. 

10 ‘‘(d) LOSS OF FEDERAL FUNDING.—A violation of 

11 subsection (a) shall be deemed for the purposes of title 

12 VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to be discrimination 

13 prohibited by section 601 of that Act. 

14 ‘‘(e) REPORTING REQUIREMENT.—A physician, phy15 sician’s assistant, nurse, counselor, or other medical or 

16 mental health professional shall report known or suspected 

17 violations of any of this section to appropriate law enforce18 ment authorities. Whoever violates this requirement shall 

19 be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 

20 year, or both. 

21 ‘‘(f) EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION.—It shall be the 

22 duty of the United States district courts, United States 

23 courts of appeal, and the Supreme Court of the United 

24 States to advance on the docket and to expedite to the 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
23 

•HR 147 IH

1 greatest possible extent the disposition of any matter 

2 brought under this section. 

3 ‘‘(g) PROTECTION OF PRIVACY IN COURT PRO4 CEEDINGS.— 

5 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Except to the extent the 

6 Constitution or other similarly compelling reason re7 quires, in every civil or criminal action under this 

8 section, the court shall make such orders as are nec9 essary to protect the anonymity of any woman upon 

10 whom an abortion has been performed or attempted 

11 if she does not give her written consent to such dis12 closure. Such orders may be made upon motion, but 

13 shall be made sua sponte if not otherwise sought by 

14 a party. 

15 ‘‘(2) ORDERS TO PARTIES, WITNESSES, AND

16 COUNSEL.—The court shall issue appropriate orders 

17 to the parties, witnesses, and counsel and shall di18 rect the sealing of the record and exclusion of indi19 viduals from courtrooms or hearing rooms to the ex20 tent necessary to safeguard the identity of the 

21 woman described in paragraph (1) from public dis22 closure. 

23 ‘‘(3) PSEUDONYM REQUIRED.—In the absence 

24 of written consent of the woman upon whom an 

25 abortion has been performed or attempted, any 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
24 

•HR 147 IH

1 party, other than a public official, who brings an ac2 tion under this section shall do so under a pseu3 donym. 

4 ‘‘(4) LIMITATION.—This subsection shall not be 

5 construed to conceal the identity of the plaintiff or 

6 of witnesses from the defendant or from attorneys 

7 for the defendant. 

8 ‘‘(h) DEFINITION.—In this section— 

9 ‘‘(1) the term ‘abortion’ means the act of using 

10 or prescribing any instrument, medicine, drug, or 

11 any other substance, device, or means with the in12 tent to terminate the clinically diagnosable preg13 nancy of a woman, with knowledge that the termi14 nation by those means will with reasonable likelihood 

15 cause the death of the unborn child, unless the act 

16 is done with the intent to— 

17 ‘‘(A) save the life or preserve the health of 

18 the unborn child; 

19 ‘‘(B) remove a dead unborn child caused 

20 by spontaneous abortion; or 

21 ‘‘(C) remove an ectopic pregnancy; 

22 ‘‘(2) the term ‘sex-selection abortion’ means an 

23 abortion undertaken for purposes of eliminating an 

24 unborn child of an undesired sex; and 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
25 

•HR 147 IH

1 ‘‘(3) the term ‘race-selection abortion’ means an 

2 abortion performed for purposes of eliminating an 

3 unborn child because the child or a parent of the 

4 child is of an undesired race.’’. 

5 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

6 at the beginning of chapter 13 of title 18, United States 

7 Code, is amended by adding after the item relating to sec8 tion 249 the following new item: 

‘‘250. Discrimination against the unborn on the basis of race or sex.’’. 

9 SEC. 4. SEVERABILITY. 

10 If any portion of this Act or the application thereof 

11 to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such inva12 lidity shall not affect the portions or applications of this 

13 Act which can be given effect without the invalid portion 

14 or application. 

Æ 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS