PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 21, 2025
Protecting Individuals with Down Syndrome Act
This bill creates new federal crimes related to the performance of an abortion on an unborn child who has Down syndrome.
It subjects a violator to criminal penalties—a fine, a prison term of up to five years, or both.
It also authorizes civil remedies, including damages and injunctive relief.
A woman who undergoes such an abortion may not be prosecuted or held civilly liable.
People & committees
Rep. Estes, Ron [R-KS-4] · R–KS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Sep 16, 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.2251 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.2251 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.2251 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.2251 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.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-03-21 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This proposal would prohibit performing an abortion when the person performing it knows that suspected or confirmed Down syndrome is at least part of the woman's reason for seeking it. Providers would have to ask about evidence of Down syndrome and, when applicable, explain the prohibition. Violators could face fines and up to five years in prison. A woman upon whom an abortion is performed would be exempt from criminal prosecution and civil liability under this section.
It shall be unlawful to— (1) perform an abortion— (A) with the knowledge that a pregnant woman is seeking an abortion, in whole or in part, on the basis of— (i) a test result indicating that the unborn child has Down syndrome; (ii) a prenatal diagnosis that the unborn child has Down syndrome; or (iii) any other reason to believe that the unborn child has or may have Down syndrome;
(B) without first— (i) asking the pregnant woman if she is aware of any test results, prenatal diagnosis, or any other evidence that the unborn child has or may have Down syndrome; and (ii) if the woman is aware that the unborn child has or may have Down syndrome, informing the pregnant woman of the prohibitions on abortion under this section;
Any person that violates, or attempts to violate, subsection (b) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
A woman upon whom an abortion is performed may not be prosecuted or held civilly liable for any violation of this section or for a conspiracy to violate this section.
The bill is named the Protecting Individuals with Down Syndrome Act. Its findings present the abortion prohibition as a measure against disability discrimination. This is the bill's stated rationale, rather than evidence of its effects.
This Act may be cited as the Protecting Individuals with Down Syndrome Act.
Consistent with the overarching Federal policy of nondiscrimination, and in light of the shameful history of targeting unborn children for abortion based on race, gender, or disabilities, Congress must combat invidious discrimination by prohibiting doctors from aborting unborn children because the unborn child has been diagnosed with Down syndrome.
The proposal would add section 250 to the federal criminal code. It defines abortion to include using or prescribing drugs, instruments, or other means with either an intent to kill the unborn child of a woman known to be pregnant or an intent to terminate her pregnancy subject to specified exclusions.
Chapter 13 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 250. Discrimination by abortion against an unborn child on the basis of down syndrome prohibited
The term abortion means the act of using or prescribing any instrument, medicine, drug, or any other substance, device, or means with the intent to— (A) kill the unborn child of a woman known to be pregnant; or (B) terminate the pregnancy of a woman known to be pregnant, with an intention other than— (i) to produce a live birth and preserve the life and health of the child born alive; (ii) to save the life of the pregnant woman; or (iii) to remove a dead unborn child.
The pregnancy-termination branch of the abortion definition excludes intentions to produce a live birth and preserve the child's life and health, save the pregnant woman's life, or remove a dead unborn child. These exclusions appear in that branch of the definition; the separate intent-to-kill branch does not repeat them.
(A) kill the unborn child of a woman known to be pregnant; or (B) terminate the pregnancy of a woman known to be pregnant, with an intention other than— (i) to produce a live birth and preserve the life and health of the child born alive; (ii) to save the life of the pregnant woman; or (iii) to remove a dead unborn child.
The bill defines Down syndrome through an extra full or partial copy of chromosome 21 or an effective three-copy condition involving that chromosome. Its definition of an unborn child runs from the beginning of biological development, including fertilization, until being born alive, with the latter term tied to an existing statutory definition.
The term Down syndrome means a chromosomal disorder associated with— (A) an extra copy of the chromosome 21, in whole or in part; or (B) an effective trisomy for chromosome 21.
The term unborn child means an individual of the species homo sapiens from the beginning of the biological development of that individual, including fertilization, until the point of being born alive, as defined in section 8(b) of title 1.
The proposed prohibition would apply when the person performing an abortion knows that Down syndrome is any part of the woman's reason for seeking it. A confirmed diagnosis would not be necessary: a test result or any other reason to believe the unborn child has or may have Down syndrome could qualify.
It shall be unlawful to— (1) perform an abortion— (A) with the knowledge that a pregnant woman is seeking an abortion, in whole or in part, on the basis of— (i) a test result indicating that the unborn child has Down syndrome; (ii) a prenatal diagnosis that the unborn child has Down syndrome; or (iii) any other reason to believe that the unborn child has or may have Down syndrome;
Before performing an abortion, the person performing it would have to ask whether the woman knows of test results, a prenatal diagnosis, or other evidence of possible Down syndrome. If she is aware of possible Down syndrome, that person would also have to explain this section's abortion prohibitions. Failure to take these steps would itself be an offense.
(B) without first— (i) asking the pregnant woman if she is aware of any test results, prenatal diagnosis, or any other evidence that the unborn child has or may have Down syndrome; and (ii) if the woman is aware that the unborn child has or may have Down syndrome, informing the pregnant woman of the prohibitions on abortion under this section;
The proposal would prohibit using force or threats of force to intentionally injure or intimidate anyone to coerce an abortion sought partly or wholly because of suspected or confirmed Down syndrome.
(2) use force or the threat of force to intentionally injure or intimidate any person for the purpose of coercing an abortion described in paragraph (1)(A);
a pregnant woman is seeking an abortion, in whole or in part, on the basis of— (i) a test result indicating that the unborn child has Down syndrome; (ii) a prenatal diagnosis that the unborn child has Down syndrome; or (iii) any other reason to believe that the unborn child has or may have Down syndrome;
The proposal would also prohibit soliciting or accepting money to perform an abortion covered by the Down-syndrome-based prohibition. Knowingly transporting a woman into the United States or across a state line to obtain such an abortion would also be prohibited.
(3) solicit or accept funds for the performance of an abortion described in paragraph (1)(A); or (4) knowingly transport a woman into the United States or across a State line for the purpose of obtaining an abortion described in paragraph (1)(A).
a pregnant woman is seeking an abortion, in whole or in part, on the basis of— (i) a test result indicating that the unborn child has Down syndrome; (ii) a prenatal diagnosis that the unborn child has Down syndrome; or (iii) any other reason to believe that the unborn child has or may have Down syndrome;
Violating or attempting to violate any of the proposed offenses in subsection (b) would carry a fine under title 18, imprisonment of up to five years, or both. The bill does not specify a dollar amount for the fine.
Any person that violates, or attempts to violate, subsection (b) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
A woman upon whom an abortion was performed or attempted in violation of the force-or-threat prohibition could sue the person who committed that violation. This particular damages provision for women is expressly tied to coercion under subsection (b)(2).
A woman upon whom an abortion has been performed or attempted in violation of subsection (b)(2) may bring a civil action in an appropriate court against any person who engaged in a violation of subsection (b)(2) to obtain appropriate relief.
The father could sue over an abortion performed or attempted in violation of subsection (b). A maternal grandparent could also sue if the pregnant woman is a minor who has not been legally emancipated. Neither could use this provision if their own criminal conduct caused the pregnancy or abortion, or if they consented to the abortion.
Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the father of an unborn child who is the subject of an abortion performed or attempted in violation of subsection (b), or a maternal grandparent of the unborn child if the pregnant woman is an unemancipated minor, may bring a civil action in an appropriate court against any person who engaged in the violation to obtain appropriate relief.
Subparagraph (A) shall not apply if— (i) the pregnancy or abortion resulted from the criminal conduct of the plaintiff described in subparagraph (A); or (ii) the plaintiff described in subparagraph (A) consented to the abortion.
Civil remedies would include objectively verifiable compensation for physical and psychological injuries, including loss of companionship and support, as well as punitive damages intended to punish misconduct. Courts would have to award reasonable attorney's fees to a plaintiff who wins a civil action under this subsection.
Appropriate relief in a civil action under this subsection includes— (A) objectively verifiable money damages for all injuries, psychological and physical, including loss of companionship and support, occasioned by the violation of this section; and (B) punitive damages.
The court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs to a prevailing plaintiff in a civil action under this subsection.
A qualifying plaintiff could seek a court order stopping a provider from performing or attempting further abortions in violation of the section. Eligible plaintiffs would include the affected woman, a maternal grandparent if she is an unemancipated minor, the father unless his criminal conduct caused the pregnancy or abortion, and the Attorney General.
A qualified plaintiff may bring a civil action in an appropriate court to obtain injunctive relief to prevent an abortion provider from performing or attempting further abortions in violation of this section.
The term qualified plaintiff means— (A) a woman upon whom an abortion is performed or attempted in violation of this section; (B) a maternal grandparent of the unborn child if the woman upon whom an abortion is performed or attempted in violation of this section is an unemancipated minor; (C) the father of an unborn child who is the subject of an abortion performed or attempted in violation of this section unless the pregnancy or abortion resulted from the criminal conduct of the father; or (D) the Attorney General.
A woman upon whom an abortion is performed could not be prosecuted or held civilly liable under this section, including for conspiracy to violate it. The immunity clause expressly refers to an abortion that is performed; it does not expressly mention an attempted abortion.
(e) Bar to prosecution A woman upon whom an abortion is performed may not be prosecuted or held civilly liable for any violation of this section or for a conspiracy to violate this section.
Under a provision headed "Loss of federal funding," a violation of subsection (b) would count as discrimination for purposes of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The operative text uses that existing law rather than spelling out a separate funding-cutoff process.
(f) Loss of federal funding A violation of subsection (b) shall be deemed discrimination for the purposes of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794).
Physicians, physician's assistants, nurses, counselors, and other medical or mental health professionals would have to report known or suspected violations to appropriate law enforcement authorities. Failure to meet this reporting duty could result in a fine, up to one year in prison, or both.
A physician, physician’s assistant, nurse, counselor, or other medical or mental health professional shall report known or suspected violations of any of this section to appropriate law enforcement authorities.
Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.
Federal district courts, federal appeals courts, and the Supreme Court would have to give matters brought under this section priority and resolve them as quickly as possible.
It shall be the duty of the district courts of the United States, the courts of appeals of the United States, and the Supreme Court of the United States to advance on the docket and to expedite to the greatest possible extent the disposition of any matter brought under this section.
In civil and criminal proceedings, courts would have to protect the identity of a woman upon whom an abortion was performed or attempted unless she consents in writing or constitutional requirements or another similarly compelling reason require disclosure. Courts would have to act even without a request, using measures such as sealing records and excluding people from hearings when necessary.
Except to the extent the Constitution of the United States or other similarly compelling reason requires, in every civil or criminal action under this section, the court shall make such orders as are necessary to protect the anonymity of any woman upon whom an abortion has been performed or attempted if she does not give her written consent to such disclosure. Such orders may be made upon motion, but shall be made sua sponte if not otherwise sought by a party.
The court shall issue appropriate orders to the parties, witnesses, and counsel and shall direct the sealing of the record and exclusion of individuals from courtrooms or hearing rooms to the extent necessary to safeguard the identity of a woman described in paragraph (1) from public disclosure.
Without the woman's written consent, anyone bringing an action other than a public official would have to use a pseudonym, meaning a substitute name. These privacy rules would not authorize hiding the identities of plaintiffs or witnesses from the defendant or the defendant's lawyers.
In the absence of written consent of the woman upon whom an abortion has been performed or attempted, any party, other than a public official, who brings an action under this section shall do so under a pseudonym.
This subsection may not be construed to conceal the identity of the plaintiff or of witnesses from the defendant or from attorneys for the defendant.
The proposal would preserve federal, state, and local laws that provide greater protection for an unborn child. It expressly would neither create or recognize a right to abortion nor make an otherwise unlawful abortion lawful.
Nothing in this section may be construed to pre-empt or limit any Federal, State, or local law that provides greater protections for an unborn child than those provided in this section.
Nothing in this section shall be construed as creating or recognizing a right to abortion nor shall it make lawful an abortion that is otherwise unlawful under Federal, State, or local law.
If a portion of the bill or its application to a person or circumstance were held invalid, other portions and applications that could operate independently would remain in effect. This is the bill's severability rule.
If any portion of this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the portions or applications of this Act which can be given effect without the invalid portion or application.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 16, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on the Judiciary on March 21, 2025. It does not establish the bill's subsequent progress or enactment status.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-16T08:09:19Z. 2025-03-21: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-03-21: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-21. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied introduced text contains an express exemption from liability for a defined class within its enforcement scheme. Classification as a targeted benefit does not imply improper purpose.
Women upon whom an abortion is performed would receive an express exemption from prosecution and civil liability for violations of this section, including conspiracy. This is a specific liability protection within the bill's abortion restrictions.
A woman upon whom an abortion is performed may not be prosecuted or held civilly liable for any violation of this section or for a conspiracy to violate this section.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 16, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI