IB
Union Calendar No. 366
107TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 4965
[Report No. 107–604]
To prohibit the procedure commonly known as partial-birth abortion.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JUNE 19, 2002
Mr. CHABOT (for himself, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. BARCIA, Mr. HYDE, Mr.
HALL of Texas, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. OBERSTAR, Mrs.
MYRICK, Mr. STUPAK, Ms. HART, Mr. MOLLOHAN, Mr. PORTMAN, and
Mr. RAHALL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary
JULY 23, 2002
Additional sponsors: Mr. PENCE, Mr. KERNS, Mr. BRYANT, Mr. BACHUS, Mr.
PITTS, Mr. PICKERING, Mr. TIBERI, Mr. SHOWS, Mr. WICKER, Mr. KEL-
LER, Mr. CANTOR, Mr. CAMP, Mr. FERGUSON, Mr. HAYES, Mr. EVER-
ETT, Mr. HALL of Ohio, Mr. MCCRERY, Mr. JEFF MILLER of Florida,
Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota, Mr. GRAVES, Mr. GRUCCI, Mr. SHIMKUS,
Mr. RYUN of Kansas, Mr. NORWOOD, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. CUNNINGHAM,
Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. BARR of Georgia, Mr. NEY, Mr. AKIN, Mr. BURTON
of Indiana, Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California, Mr. LINDER, Mr.
COSTELLO, Mr. ENGLISH, Mr. SHUSTER, Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin, Mr.
WELDON of Pennsylvania, Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mr. WELLER, Mr.
WHITFIELD, Mr. DELAY, Mr. GOODE, Mr. MANZULLO, Mr. BUYER, Mr.
ADERHOLT, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. ROGERS of Michigan, Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS
of Virginia, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. JOHN, Mr. BLUNT, Mr. TAYLOR of
Mississippi, Mr. SOUDER, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. PHELPS, Mr. ARMEY, Mr.
PETRI, Mr. HANSEN, Mr. HILLEARY, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr.
ROEMER, Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky, Mr. STUMP, Mr. WAMP, Mr. GUT-
KNECHT, Mr. WELDON of Florida, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. COLLINS, Mr.
HULSHOF, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mrs.
NORTHUP, Mr. LUCAS of Oklahoma, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. WATKINS, Mr.
THUNE, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. TOOMEY, Mr.
SCHROCK, Mr. CRANE, Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma, Mr. VITTER, Mr. STEN-
HOLM, Mr. ISSA, Mr. TERRY, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. PUTNAM,
Mr. BAKER, Mr. TAYLOR
of North Carolina, Mr. FORBES, Mr.
TANCREDO, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. SESSIONS,
Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. UPTON, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. LUCAS of Kentucky, Mr.
HOSTETTLER, Mr. HAYWORTH, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Mr. CAN-
NON, Mrs. EMERSON, Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, Mr. SCHAFFER, Mr.
LATOURETTE, Mr. JENKINS, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. OXLEY, Mr.
MICA, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. COBLE, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. PETERSON
of Pennsylvania, Mr. EHLERS, Mr. HOEKSTRA, Mr. FLETCHER, Mr.
LAHOOD, Mr. BALLENGER, Mrs. CUBIN, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. COOKSEY,
Mr. RILEY, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mr. MORAN of Kansas, Mr. HEFLEY, Mr.
OSBORNE, Mr. SHERWOOD, Mr. CULBERSON, Mr. ISTOOK, Mr. SKEEN,
Mr. REHBERG, Mr. CRENSHAW, Mr. GANSKE, Mr. GOSS, Mr. PLATTS,
Mr. POMBO, Mr. NUSSLE, and Mr. WOLF
JULY 23, 2002
Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union
and ordered to be printed
A BILL
To prohibit the procedure commonly known as partial-birth
abortion.
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 ‘‘Partial-Birth Abortion
Ban Act of 2002’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds and declares the following:
(1) A moral, medical, and ethical consensus ex-
ists that the practice of performing a partial-birth
abortion—an abortion in which a physician delivers
an unborn child’s body until only the head remains
inside the womb, punctures the back of the child’s
skull with a sharp instrument, and sucks the child’s
brains out before completing delivery of the dead in-
fant—is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is
never medically necessary and should be prohibited.
(2) Rather than being an abortion procedure
that is embraced by the medical community, particu-
larly among physicians who routinely perform other
abortion procedures, partial-birth abortion remains a
disfavored procedure that is not only unnecessary to
preserve the health of the mother, but in fact poses
serious risks to the long-term health of women and
in some circumstances, their lives. As a result, at
least 27 States banned the procedure as did the
United States Congress which voted to ban the pro-
cedure during the 104th, 105th, and 106th Con-
gresses.
(3) In Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914, 932
(2000), the United States Supreme Court opined
‘‘that significant medical authority supports the
proposition that in some circumstances, [partial
birth abortion] would be the safest procedure’’ for
pregnant women who wish to undergo an abortion.
Thus, the Court struck down the State of Nebras-
ka’s ban on partial-birth abortion procedures, con-
cluding that it placed an ‘‘undue burden’’ on women