I 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 1151 
To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide the protections of habeas 
corpus for certain incapacitated individuals whose life is in jeopardy, 
and for other purposes. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MARCH 8, 2005 
Mr. WELDON of Florida (for himself, Mr. STUPAK, Mr. TAYLOR of Mis-
sissippi, Mr. ORTIZ, Mr. RAHALL, Mr. MOLLOHAN, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. LI-
PINSKI, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. PENCE, Mr. ADERHOLT, Mr. HERGER, Mr. 
AKIN, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. FEENEY, Ms. 
HART, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, Ms. FOXX, Mr. BARTLETT of Mary-
land, Mr. PITTS, Mr. HOSTETTLER, Mrs. MUSGRAVE, Mr. BARRETT of 
South Carolina, Mr. RYUN of Kansas, Mr. ISTOOK, Mr. CHOCOLA, Mr. 
SODREL, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. CANTOR, Mr. COX, Mr. TANCREDO, Mr. 
DOOLITTLE, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. GUTKNECHT, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. 
SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. 
CHABOT, Mr. MCCOTTER, Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota, Mr. BILIRAKIS, 
Mr. SOUDER, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. INGLIS 
of South Carolina, Mr. RENZI, Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin, Mr. MICA, Mr. 
LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida, Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia, Mr. 
CRENSHAW, Mr. KELLER, Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida, Mr. 
STEARNS, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. HYDE, Mr. BLUNT, Mrs. 
BLACKBURN, Mr. FITZPATRICK of Pennsylvania, Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky, 
and Mr. PLATTS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on the Judiciary 
A BILL 
To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide the protec-
tions of habeas corpus for certain incapacitated individ-
uals whose life is in jeopardy, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Incapacitated Persons 
Legal Protection Act of 2005’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. 
(a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds the following: 
(1) Under the Fourteenth Amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States, ‘‘No State . . . 
shall deprive any person of life . . . without due 
process of law...nor deny to any person within its ju-
risdiction the equal protection of the laws.’’ 
(2) Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment 
empowers Congress ‘‘to enforce, by appropriate leg-
islation, the provisions’’ of the Amendment. The 
United States Supreme Court has held that under 
this section, while Congress may not work a ‘‘sub-
stantive change in the governing law’’ under the 
other sections of the Fourteenth Amendment, it may 
adopt remedial measures exhibiting ‘‘a congruence 
and proportionality between the injury to be pre-
vented or remedied and the means adopted to that 
end.’’ Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, 21 (2004); 
City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507, 519–20 
(1997).
(b) PURPOSES.—It is the purpose of this Act— 
(1) to facilitate balancing the acknowledged 
right of persons to refuse consent to medical treat-
ment and unwanted bodily intrusions with the right 
to consent to treatment, food, and fluids so as to 
preserve their lives; and 
(2) in circumstances in which there is a con-
tested judicial proceeding because of dispute about 
the expressed previous wishes or best interests of a 
person presently incapable of making known a choice 
concerning treatment, food, and fluids the denial of 
which will result in death, to provide that the funda-
mental due process and equal protection rights of in-
capacitated persons are protected by ensuring the 
availability of collateral review through habeas cor-
pus proceedings. 
SEC. 3. EXTENSION OF HABEAS PROTECTIONS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 153 of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended by striking section 2256 and in-
serting the following: 
‘‘§ 2256. Extension of habeas protections to certain 
persons subject to court orders 
‘‘(a) For the purposes of this chapter, an incapaci-
tated person shall be deemed to be in custody under sen-
tence of a court established by Congress, or deemed to