I 
117TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 3755 
To protect a person’s ability to determine whether to continue or end a 
pregnancy, and to protect a health care provider’s ability to provide 
abortion services. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JUNE 8, 2021 
Ms. CHU (for herself, Mr. ALLRED, Ms. BARRAGA´N, Mr. BERA, Mr. BLU-
MENAUER, Ms. BLUNT ROCHESTER, Ms. BONAMICI, Mr. BROWN, Ms. 
BROWNLEY, Ms. BUSH, Mr. CARBAJAL, Mr. CA´RDENAS, Mr. CARSON, 
Mr. CASE, Mr. CASTEN, Ms. CASTOR of Florida, Mr. CICILLINE, Ms. 
CLARK of Massachusetts, Ms. CLARKE of New York, Mr. CLEAVER, Mr. 
COHEN, Mr. CONNOLLY, Mr. COOPER, Mr. COURTNEY, Mr. CRIST, Mr. 
CROW, Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois, Ms. DEAN, Mr. DEFAZIO, Ms. 
DEGETTE, Ms. DELAURO, Ms. DELBENE, Mr. DELGADO, Mrs. 
DEMINGS, Mr. DESAULNIER, Mr. DEUTCH, Mr. DOGGETT, Mr. MICHAEL 
F. DOYLE of Pennsylvania, Ms. ESCOBAR, Mrs. FLETCHER, Mr. FOSTER, 
Ms. LOIS FRANKEL of Florida, Mr. GALLEGO, Ms. GARCIA of Texas, Mr. 
GARCI´A
of Illinois, Mr. GOMEZ, Mrs. HAYES, Mr. HIMES, Ms. 
HOULAHAN, Ms. JACKSON LEE, Ms. JACOBS of California, Ms. JAYAPAL, 
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia, Mr. JONES, Mr. KAHELE, Ms. KELLY of Illi-
nois, Mr. KILMER, Mrs. KIRKPATRICK, Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI, Ms. 
KUSTER, Mr. LARSEN of Washington, Mr. LARSON of Connecticut, Mrs. 
LAWRENCE, Mrs. LEE of Nevada, Ms. LEE of California, Mr. LEVIN of 
Michigan, Mr. LEVIN of California, Mr. LIEU, Mr. LOWENTHAL, Mrs. 
CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York, Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of 
New York, Ms. MATSUI, Ms. MCCOLLUM, Mr. MCEACHIN, Mr. MCNER-
NEY, Mr. MEEKS, Ms. MENG, Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin, Mr. MORELLE, 
Mr. MOULTON, Mr. NADLER, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Mr. NEGUSE, Ms. NEW-
MAN, Ms. NORTON, Mr. O’HALLERAN, Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ, Ms. OMAR, 
Mr. PAYNE, Ms. PINGREE, Mr. POCAN, Ms. PRESSLEY, Mr. PRICE of 
North Carolina, Mr. RASKIN, Miss RICE of New York, Ms. ROSS, Mr. 
RYAN, Mr. SARBANES, Ms. SCANLON, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. SCHIFF, 
Mr. SCHRADER, Mr. SHERMAN, Mr. SIRES, Mr. SMITH of Washington, 
Mr. SOTO, Ms. SPEIER, Mr. STANTON, Ms. STRICKLAND, Mr. 
SWALWELL, Ms. TLAIB, Mr. TONKO, Mr. TORRES of New York, Mr. 
TRONE, Ms. UNDERWOOD, Mr. VARGAS, Ms. VELA´ZQUEZ, Ms. 
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Ms. WATERS, Mr. WELCH, Ms. WILD, Ms. WIL-
LIAMS of Georgia, Ms. WILSON of Florida, Mr. PERLMUTTER, Ms. TITUS, 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6652
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Mr. AUCHINCLOSS, Mr. ESPAILLAT, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Mr. 
BUTTERFIELD, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. TAKANO, Mr. KEATING, Mr. COSTA, 
Mr. HUFFMAN, Mr. CASTRO of Texas, Ms. DAVIDS of Kansas, Mr. CART-
WRIGHT, Mr. LAWSON of Florida, Mr. SCHNEIDER, Ms. SEWELL, Mr. 
RUPPERSBERGER, Mr. KIM of New Jersey, Ms. ADAMS, Mr. YARMUTH, 
Mr. BRENDAN F. BOYLE of Pennsylvania, Ms. SA´NCHEZ, Mr. EVANS, 
Mr. LYNCH, Mrs. TRAHAN, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. NEAL, Mr. SUOZZI, Mr. 
PANETTA, Mr. PETERS, Mr. THOMPSON of California, Ms. LOFGREN, 
Mrs. MCBATH, Ms. SCHRIER, Mr. HORSFORD, Mr. KIND, Mrs. BEATTY, 
Mr. KHANNA, Mr. HIGGINS of New York, Mr. GREEN of Texas, Ms. 
JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. RUIZ, Mrs. MURPHY of Florida, Mr. PAPPAS, 
Mr. GOTTHEIMER, Mr. MRVAN, Ms. MANNING, Mr. GRIJALVA, and Mr. 
BEYER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Com-
mittee on Energy and Commerce 
A BILL 
To protect a person’s ability to determine whether to con-
tinue or end a pregnancy, and to protect a health care 
provider’s ability to provide abortion services. 
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 ‘‘Women’s Health Pro-
tection Act of 2021’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) Abortion services are essential to health 
care and access to those services is central to peo-
ple’s ability to participate equally in the economic 
and social life of the United States. Abortion access 
allows people who are pregnant to make their own 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
decisions about their pregnancies, their families, and 
their lives. 
(2) Since 1973, the Supreme Court repeatedly 
has recognized the constitutional right to terminate 
a pregnancy before fetal viability, and to terminate 
a pregnancy after fetal viability where it is nec-
essary, in the good-faith medical judgment of the 
treating health care professional, for the preserva-
tion of the life or health of the person who is preg-
nant. 
(3) Nonetheless, access to abortion services has 
been obstructed across the United States in various 
ways, including blockades of health care facilities 
and associated violence, prohibitions of, and restric-
tions on, insurance coverage; parental involvement 
laws (notification and consent); restrictions that 
shame and stigmatize people seeking abortion serv-
ices; and medically unnecessary regulations that nei-
ther confer any health benefit nor further the safety 
of abortion services, but which harm people by de-
laying, complicating access to, and reducing the 
availability of, abortion services. 
(4) Reproductive justice requires every indi-
vidual to have the right to make their own decisions 
about having children regardless of their cir-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
cumstances and without interference and discrimina-
tion. Reproductive Justice is a human right that can 
and will be achieved when all people, regardless of 
actual or perceived race, color, national origin, immi-
gration status, sex (including gender identity, sex 
stereotyping, or sexual orientation), age, or disability 
status have the economic, social, and political power 
and resources to define and make decisions about 
their bodies, health, sexuality, families, and commu-
nities in all areas of their lives, with dignity and 
self-determination. 
(5) Reproductive justice seeks to address re-
strictions on reproductive health, including abortion, 
that perpetuate systems of oppression, lack of bodily 
autonomy, white supremacy, and anti-Black racism. 
This violent legacy has manifested in policies includ-
ing enslavement, rape, and experimentation on Black 
women; forced sterilizations; medical experimen-
tation on low-income women’s reproductive systems; 
and the forcible removal of Indigenous children. Ac-
cess to equitable reproductive health care, including 
abortion services, has always been deficient in the 
United States for Black, Indigenous, and other Peo-
ple of Color (BIPOC) and their families. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
(6) The legacy of restrictions on reproductive 
health, rights, and justice is not a dated vestige of 
a dark history. Presently, the harms of abortion-spe-
cific restrictions fall especially heavily on people with 
low incomes, BIPOC, immigrants, young people, 
people with disabilities, and those living in rural and 
other medically underserved areas. Abortion-specific 
restrictions are even more compounded by the ongo-
ing criminalization of people who are pregnant, in-
cluding those who are incarcerated, living with HIV, 
or with substance-use disorders. These communities 
already experience health disparities due to social, 
political, and environmental inequities, and restric-
tions on abortion services exacerbate these harms. 
Removing medically unjustified restrictions on abor-
tion services would constitute one important step on 
the path toward realizing Reproductive Justice by 
ensuring that the full range of reproductive health 
care is accessible to all who need it. 
(7) Abortion-specific restrictions are a tool of 
gender oppression, as they target health care serv-
ices that are used primarily by women. These pater-
nalistic restrictions rely on and reinforce harmful 
stereotypes about gender roles, women’s decision- 
making, and women’s need for protection instead of 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
support, undermining their ability to control their 
own lives and well-being. These restrictions harm the 
basic autonomy, dignity, and equality of women, and 
their ability to participate in the social and economic 
life of the Nation. 
(8) The terms ‘‘woman’’ and ‘‘women’’ are used 
in this bill to reflect the identity of the majority of 
people targeted and affected by restrictions on abor-
tion services, and to address squarely the targeted 
restrictions on abortion, which are rooted in misog-
yny. However, access to abortion services is critical 
to the health of every person capable of becoming 
pregnant. This Act is intended to protect all people 
with the capacity for pregnancy—cisgender women, 
transgender men, non-binary individuals, those who 
identify with a different gender, and others—who 
are unjustly harmed by restrictions on abortion serv-
ices. 
(9) Since 2011, States and local governments 
have passed nearly 500 restrictions singling out 
health care providers who offer abortion services, 
interfering with their ability to provide those services 
and the patients’ ability to obtain those services. 
(10) Many State and local governments have 
imposed restrictions on the provision of abortion 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
services that are neither evidence-based nor gen-
erally applicable to the medical profession or to 
other medically comparable outpatient gynecological 
procedures, such as endometrial ablations, dilation 
and curettage for reasons other than abortion, 
hysteroscopies, loop electrosurgical excision proce-
dures, or other analogous non-gynecological proce-
dures performed in similar outpatient settings in-
cluding vasectomy, sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. 
(11) Abortion is essential health care and one 
of the safest medical procedures in the United 
States. An independent, comprehensive review of the 
state of science on the safety and quality of abortion 
services, published by the National Academies of 
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in 2018, found 
that abortion in the United States is safe and effec-
tive and that the biggest threats to the quality of 
abortion services in the United States are State reg-
ulations that create barriers to care. These abortion- 
specific restrictions conflict with medical standards 
and are not supported by the recommendations and 
guidelines issued by leading reproductive health care 
professional organizations including the American 
College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Soci-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
ety of Family Planning, the National Abortion Fed-
eration, the World Health Organization, and others. 
(12) Many abortion-specific restrictions do not 
confer any health or safety benefits on the patient. 
Instead, these restrictions have the purpose and ef-
fect of unduly burdening people’s personal and pri-
vate medical decisions to end their pregnancies by 
making access to abortion services more difficult, 
invasive, and costly, often forcing people to travel 
significant distances and make multiple unnecessary 
visits to the provider, and in some cases, foreclosing 
the option altogether. For example, a 2018 report 
from the University of California San Francisco’s 
Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health 
research group found that in 27 cities across the 
United States, people have to travel more than 100 
miles in any direction to reach an abortion provider. 
(13) An overwhelming majority of abortions in 
the United States are provided in clinics, not hos-
pitals, but the large majority of counties throughout 
the United States have no clinics that provide abor-
tion. 
(14) These restrictions additionally harm peo-
ple’s health by reducing access not only to abortion 
services but also to other essential health care serv-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
ices offered by many of the providers targeted by the 
restrictions, including— 
(A) screenings and preventive services, in-
cluding contraceptive services; 
(B) testing and treatment for sexually 
transmitted infections; 
(C) LGBTQ health services; and 
(D) referrals for primary care, intimate 
partner violence prevention, prenatal care and 
adoption services. 
(15) The cumulative effect of these numerous 
restrictions has been to severely limit the availability 
of abortion services in some areas, creating a patch-
work system where access to abortion services is 
more available in some States than in others. A 
2019 report from the Government Accountability Of-
fice examining State Medicaid compliance with abor-
tion coverage requirements analyzed seven key chal-
lenges (identified both by health care providers and 
research literature) and their effect on abortion ac-
cess, and found that access to abortion services var-
ied across the States and even within a State. 
(16) International human rights law recognizes 
that access to abortion is intrinsically linked to the 
rights to life, health, equality and non-discrimina-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
tion, privacy, and freedom from ill-treatment. United 
Nations (UN) human rights treaty monitoring bod-
ies have found that legal abortion services, like other 
reproductive health care services, must be available, 
accessible, affordable, acceptable, and of good qual-
ity. UN human rights treaty bodies have likewise 
condemned medically unnecessary barriers to abor-
tion services, including mandatory waiting periods, 
biased counseling requirements, and third-party au-
thorization requirements. 
(17) Core human rights treaties ratified by the 
United States protect access to abortion. For exam-
ple, in 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee, 
which oversees implementation of the ICCPR, made 
clear that the right to life, enshrined in Article 6 of 
the ICCPR, at a minimum requires governments to 
provide safe, legal, and effective access to abortion 
where a person’s life and health is at risk, or when 
carrying a pregnancy to term would cause substan-
tial pain or suffering. The Committee stated that 
governments must not impose restrictions on abor-
tion which subject women and girls to physical or 
mental pain or suffering, discriminate against them, 
arbitrarily interfere with their privacy, or place them 
at risk of undertaking unsafe abortions. Further-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
more, the Committee stated that governments should 
remove existing barriers that deny effective access to 
safe and legal abortion, refrain from introducing 
new barriers to abortion, and prevent the stigmatiza-
tion of those seeking abortion. 
(18) UN independent human rights experts 
have expressed particular concern about barriers to 
abortion services in the United States. For example, 
at the conclusion of his 2017 visit to the United 
States, the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme pov-
erty and human rights noted concern that low-in-
come women face legal and practical obstacles to ex-
ercising their constitutional right to access abortion 
services, trapping many women in cycles of poverty. 
Similarly, in May 2020, the UN Working Group on 
discrimination against women and girls, along with 
other human rights experts, expressed concern that 
some states had manipulated the COVID–19 crisis 
to restrict access to abortion, which the experts rec-
ognized as ‘‘the latest example illustrating a pattern 
of restrictions and retrogressions in access to legal 
abortion care across the country’’ and reminded 
U.S. authorities that abortion care constitutes essen-
tial health care that must remain available during 
and after the pandemic. They noted that barriers to 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
abortion access exacerbate systemic inequalities and 
cause particular harm to marginalized communities, 
including low-income people, people of color, immi-
grants, people with disabilities, and LGBTQ people. 
(19) Abortion-specific restrictions affect the 
cost and availability of abortion services, and the 
settings in which abortion services are delivered. 
People travel across State lines and otherwise en-
gage in interstate commerce to access this essential 
medical care, and more would be forced to do so ab-
sent this Act. Likewise, health care providers travel 
across State lines and otherwise engage in interstate 
commerce in order to provide abortion services to 
patients, and more would be forced to do so absent 
this Act. 
(20) Health care providers engage in a form of 
economic and commercial activity when they provide 
abortion services, and there is an interstate market 
for abortion services. 
(21) Abortion restrictions substantially affect 
interstate commerce in numerous ways. For exam-
ple, to provide abortion services, health care pro-
viders engage in interstate commerce to purchase 
medicine, medical equipment, and other necessary 
goods and services. To provide and assist others in 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
providing abortion services, health care providers en-
gage in interstate commerce to obtain and provide 
training. To provide abortion services, health care 
providers employ and obtain commercial services 
from doctors, nurses, and other personnel who en-
gage in interstate commerce and travel across State 
lines. 
(22) It is difficult and time and resource-con-
suming for clinics to challenge State laws that bur-
den or impede abortion services. Litigation that 
blocks one abortion restriction may not prevent a 
State from adopting other similarly burdensome 
abortion restrictions or using different methods to 
burden or impede abortion services. There is a his-
tory and pattern of States passing successive and 
different laws that unduly burden abortion services. 
(23) When a health care provider ceases pro-
viding abortion services as a result of burdensome 
and medically unnecessary regulations, it is often 
difficult or impossible for that health care provider 
to recommence providing those abortion services, 
and difficult or impossible for other health care pro-
viders to provide abortion services that restore or re-
place the ceased abortion services. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
(24) Health care providers are subject to license 
laws in various jurisdictions, which are not affected 
by this Act except as provided in this Act. 
(25) Congress has the authority to enact this 
Act to protect abortion services pursuant to— 
(A) its powers under the commerce clause 
of section 8 of article I of the Constitution of 
the United States; 
(B) its powers under section 5 of the Four-
teenth Amendment to the Constitution of the 
United States to enforce the provisions of sec-
tion 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment; and 
(C) its powers under the necessary and 
proper clause of section 8 of Article I of the 
Constitution of the United States. 
(26) Congress has used its authority in the past 
to protect access to abortion services and health care 
providers’ ability to provide abortion services. In the 
early 1990s, protests and blockades at health care 
facilities where abortion services were provided, and 
associated violence, increased dramatically and 
reached crisis level, requiring Congressional action. 
Congress passed the Freedom of Access to Clinic 
Entrances Act (Public Law 103–259; 108 Stat. 694) 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
to address that situation and protect physical access 
to abortion services. 
(27) Congressional action is necessary to put an 
end to harmful restrictions, to federally protect ac-
cess to abortion services for everyone regardless of 
where they live, and to protect the ability of health 
care providers to provide these services in a safe and 
accessible manner. 
(b) PURPOSE.—It is the purpose of this Act— 
(1) to permit health care providers to provide 
abortion services without limitations or requirements 
that single out the provision of abortion services for 
restrictions that are more burdensome than those re-
strictions imposed on medically comparable proce-
dures, do not significantly advance reproductive 
health or the safety of abortion services, and make 
abortion services more difficult to access; 
(2) to promote access to abortion services and 
women’s ability to participate equally in the eco-
nomic and social life of the United States; and 
(3) to invoke Congressional authority, including 
the powers of Congress under the commerce clause 
of section 8 of article I of the Constitution of the 
United States, its powers under section 5 of the 
Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
United States to enforce the provisions of section 1 
of the Fourteenth Amendment, and its powers under 
the necessary and proper clause of section 8 of arti-
cle I of the Constitution of the United States. 
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 
In this Act: 
(1) ABORTION SERVICES.—The term ‘‘abortion 
services’’ means an abortion and any medical or 
non-medical services related to and provided in con-
junction with an abortion (whether or not provided 
at the same time or on the same day as the abor-
tion). 
(2) GOVERNMENT.—The term ‘‘government’’ 
includes each branch, department, agency, instru-
mentality, and official (and other person acting 
under color of law) of the United States or a State. 
(3) HEALTH
CARE
PROVIDER.—The term 
‘‘health care provider’’ means any entity or indi-
vidual (including any physician, certified nurse-mid-
wife, nurse practitioner, and physician assistant) 
that— 
(A) is engaged or seeks to engage in the 
delivery of health care services, including abor-
tion services, and 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
(B) if required by law or regulation to be 
licensed or certified to engage in the delivery of 
such services— 
(i) is so licensed or certified, or 
(ii) would be so licensed or certified 
but for their past, present, or potential 
provision of abortion services permitted by 
section 4. 
(4) MEDICALLY
COMPARABLE
PROCEDURE.— 
The term ‘‘medically comparable procedures’’ means 
medical procedures that are similar in terms of 
health and safety risks to the patient, complexity, or 
the clinical setting that is indicated. 
(5) PREGNANCY.—The term ‘‘pregnancy’’ refers 
to the period of the human reproductive process be-
ginning with the implantation of a fertilized egg. 
(6) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ includes the 
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto 
Rico, and each territory and possession of the 
United States, and any subdivision of any of the 
foregoing. 
(7) VIABILITY.—The term ‘‘viability’’ means 
the point in a pregnancy at which, in the good-faith 
medical judgment of the treating health care pro-
vider, based on the particular facts of the case be-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:21 Jul 13, 2021
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3755.IH
H3755
pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS