PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 3, 2025
Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act
This bill establishes requirements for the degree of care a health care practitioner must provide in the case of a child born alive following an abortion or attempted abortion.
Specifically, a health care practitioner who is present must (1) exercise the same degree of care as would reasonably be provided to any other child born alive at the same gestational age, and (2) ensure the child is immediately admitted to a hospital. Additionally, a health care practitioner or other employee who has knowledge of a failure to comply with the degree-of-care requirements must immediately report such failure to law enforcement.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
A health care practitioner who fails to provide the required degree of care, or a health care practitioner or other employee who fails to report such failure, is subject to criminal penalties—a fine, up to five years in prison, or both.
An individual who intentionally kills or attempts to kill a child born alive is subject to prosecution for murder.
The bill bars the criminal prosecution of a mother of a child born alive under this bill and allows her to bring a civil action against a health care practitioner or other employee for violations.
People & committees
Rep. Wagner, Ann [R-MO-2] · R–MO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 217 - 204, 1 Present (Roll no. 27). (text: CR H335-336)
House roll call 27 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 217 - 204, 1 Present (Roll no. 27). (text: CR H335-336)
House roll call 27 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 205 - 216 (Roll no. 26).
House roll call 26 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H347-348)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 21, the Chair put the question on the motion to recommit and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Chu demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
The previous question on the motion to recommit was ordered pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX.
Ms. Chu moved to recommit to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text: CR H344-345)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 21.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 5. (consideration: CR H335-345)
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 19, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.21 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.21 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.21 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.21 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.