II 118th CONGRESS 1st Session S. 317 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES February 9, 2023 Mr. Kaine (for himself, Ms. Murkowski , Ms. Sinema , and Ms. Collins ) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary A BILL To guarantee that Americans have the freedom to make certain reproductive decisions without undue government interference.

1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Reproductive Freedom for All Act . 2. Purpose It is the purpose of this Act to guarantee that Americans have the freedom to make certain reproductive decisions without undue government interference, consistent with the essential holdings of Griswold v. Connecticut (381 U.S. 479 (1965)), Eisenstadt v. Baird (405 U.S. 438 (1972)), Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113 (1973)), Carey v. Population Services International (431 U.S. 678 (1977)), Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (505 U.S. 833 (1992)), and Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (579 U.S. 582 (2016)). 3. Findings Congress finds the following: (1) For decades, the Supreme Court of the United States has held that the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States encompasses a right to make certain reproductive decisions without undue government interference. (2) While these precedents have advanced slightly different constitutional rationales, and have acknowledged that some government regulation is acceptable, they have created a society whereby Americans expect to make certain reproductive decisions without undue government interference. Generations of American women have relied on the fact that they have the freedom to make such choices as a matter of fundamental personal right. (3) The right to make certain reproductive decisions without undue government interference should be guaranteed for all Americans, consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection and due process under the law. (4) The Supreme Court has reversed five decades of jurisprudence in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (142 S. Ct. 2228 (2022)), concluding that questions related to the legality of abortion services are a matter for legislative action rather than constitutional protection. (5) In light of the Dobbs ruling that the legality of abortion services is now a matter of legislative action, it is appropriate to enact the essential holdings of the cases referred to in section 2 so that Americans are guaranteed the freedom to make the reproductive decisions discussed therein. The absence of such a guarantee has a profound effect upon the quality of Americans’ lives, particularly the lives of women. As such, this action is an appropriate exercise of the Congressional power established in section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. By continuing to protect their reliance on fundamental reproductive rights, such a guarantee will improve the general welfare for generations of American women. (6) Enacting this guarantee is also justified as congressional regulation of interstate commerce because contraception and abortion services are economic transactions that frequently involve the shipment of goods, the provision of services, and the travel of persons across State lines. 4. Reproductive freedom (a) In general All persons shall have the right to make certain reproductive decisions without undue government interference, consistent with the provisions of this Act. (b) Authority A State— (1) shall not prohibit an individual from obtaining or using contraceptives or contraceptive care; (2) shall not impose an undue burden on the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability; (3) may regulate the termination of a pregnancy after fetal viability, provided that a State shall not prohibit the termination of a pregnancy that, in the appropriate medical judgment of the attending health care practitioner or practitioners, is medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant woman; and (4) may enact reasonable regulations to further the health or safety of a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, unless such regulations impose an undue burden pursuant to paragraph (2). (c) Rule of construction Nothing in this Act shall be construed to have any effect on laws regarding conscience protection. 5. Enforcement The Attorney General of the United States or any person adversely affected by State laws passed in contravention of this Act may seek injunctive relief in a Federal district or State court. In any action or proceeding under this section, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs. 6. Definitions (a) In general In this Act: (1) Fetal viability The term fetal viability means the time at which, in the appropriate medical judgment of the attending health care practitioner or practitioners, there is a realistic possibility of maintaining and nourishing a life outside the womb. (2) Reasonable The term reasonable with respect to a regulation referred to in paragraph (4) of section 4(b), means that the regulation is consistent with the essential holdings of the cases referred to in section 2. (3) State The term State includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each other territory or possession of the United States, and any subdivision of any of the foregoing. (b) Undue burden For purposes of this Act, an undue burden shall be deemed to exist, and the related provision of law shall be invalid under section 4, if the purpose or effect of such law is to place a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability. 7. Severability If any provision of this Act, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance is held to be invalid, the remainder of this Act and the application of the provisions of such to any person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby.