IV 
117TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. RES. 1155 
Expressing support for contraceptive rights and access in the United States 
and expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding 
comprehensive reproductive health care. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JUNE 7, 2022 
Ms. MANNING (for herself, Mr. NADLER, Ms. DEGETTE, Ms. STEVENS, Ms. 
ESCOBAR, Ms. LOIS FRANKEL of Florida, Ms. LEE of California, Ms. 
TITUS, Mr. GRIJALVA, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Ms. SPEIER, Ms. CASTOR of 
Florida, Mr. CONNOLLY, Ms. STANSBURY, Ms. NORTON, Mr. SMITH of 
Washington, Mr. LEVIN of Michigan, Mr. EVANS, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Ms. 
WASSERMAN
SCHULTZ, Mr. BROWN
of Maryland, Ms. CHU, Mr. 
KHANNA, Mrs. LEE of Nevada, Mr. CA´RDENAS, Ms. BARRAGA´N, Mr. 
MCGOVERN, Mr. MALINOWSKI, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Ms. ADAMS, Mr. 
DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. TAKANO, Ms. JACOBS of California, Ms. 
WILLIAMS of Georgia, Mr. SOTO, and Ms. KUSTER) submitted the fol-
lowing resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a pe-
riod to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for con-
sideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the com-
mittee concerned 
RESOLUTION 
Expressing support for contraceptive rights and access in 
the United States and expressing the sense of the House 
of Representatives regarding comprehensive reproductive 
health care. 
Whereas the Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized that 
any concept of liberty must include the right to make 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
02:34 Jun 08, 2022
Jkt 029200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR1155.IH
HR1155
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
•HRES 1155 IH 
personal decisions about bodily integrity, autonomy, fam-
ily, and relationships; 
Whereas June 7, 2022, marks the 57th anniversary of the 
landmark Griswold v. Connecticut (381 U.S. 479 (1965)) 
decision in which the Supreme Court first held that the 
Constitution protects the right to use contraception; 
Whereas Eisenstadt v. Baird (405 U.S. 438 (1972)) con-
firmed the constitutional right of all people to legally ac-
cess contraception regardless of marital status; 
Whereas Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113 (1973)) established that 
the constitutional right to privacy includes the right to 
abortion; 
Whereas the Supreme Court is now (as of the date of adop-
tion of this resolution) considering Dobbs v. Jackson 
Women’s Health Organization (141 S.Ct. 2619 (2021)), 
a case that the Justices could use to overturn or severely 
undermine Roe v. Wade; 
Whereas a leaked draft opinion of the majority opinion in 
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization signals 
the intent of the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. 
Wade; 
Whereas the gutting or overturning of Roe v. Wade threatens 
precedent protecting marital, familial, and sexual privacy, 
including the right to contraception, that has been re-
peatedly affirmed by the Supreme Court, including in 
Obergefell v. Hodges (576 U.S. 644 (2015)), and relied 
upon in this country for almost 60 years; 
Whereas the overturning of Roe v. Wade will activate ‘‘trig-
ger laws’’ in various States that would create a near-total 
ban on abortion and, in some States, make performing an 
abortion a felony under State law, and as of this writing, 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
02:34 Jun 08, 2022
Jkt 029200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR1155.IH
HR1155
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS