PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on the Judiciary. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 113-844.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 13, 2013
Women's Health Protection Act of 2013 - Makes the following limitations and requirements concerning abortion services unlawful and prohibits their imposition or application by any government:
a requirement that a medical professional perform specific tests or follow specific medical procedures, unless generally required in the case of medically comparable procedures;
a limitation on an abortion provider's ability to delegate tasks, other than one applicable to medically comparable procedures;
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
a limitation on an abortion provider's ability to prescribe or dispense drugs based on her or his good-faith medical judgment, other than one generally applicable;
a limitation on an abortion provider's ability to provide abortion services via telemedicine, other than one generally applicable;
a requirement or limitation concerning the physical plant, equipment, staffing, or hospital transfer arrangements of facilities where abortions are performed, or the credentials, hospital privileges, or status of personnel at such facilities that is not otherwise imposed where medically comparable procedures are performed;
a requirement that, prior to obtaining an abortion, a woman make medically unnecessary visits to the provider of abortion services or to any individual or entity that does not provide such services; and
a requirement or limitation that prohibits or restricts medical training for abortion procedures, other than one generally applicable to medically comparable procedures.
Makes unlawful a measure or action that restricts the provision of abortion services, or the facilities that provide them, that is similar to any of those described above if it singles out abortion services or make abortion services more difficult to access and does not significantly advance women's health or the safety of abortion services.
Provides standards for the making of a prima facie case in a civil action challenging such restrictions and factors to be considered by a court in determining whether a measure or action impedes access to abortion services.
Makes the following other restrictions on the performance of abortion unlawful and prohibits their imposition or application by any government:
a prohibition or ban prior to fetal viability;
a prohibition after fetal viability when, in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating physician, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the woman's life or health;
a restriction that limits a woman's ability to obtain an immediate abortion when a health care professional believes, based on good-faith medical judgment, that delay would pose a risk to the woman's health; and
a prohibition or restriction on obtaining an abortion prior to fetal viability based on a woman's reasons or perceived reasons or that requires her to state her reasons before obtaining an abortion prior to fetal viability.
Requires courts to liberally construe the provisions of this Act.
Authorizes the Attorney General or an individual or entity aggrieved by (or a health facility or medical professional adversely affected by) a violation of this Act, to commence a civil action for injunctive relief.
Preempts any provision enacted by a state or subdivision having the force of law that conflicts with any provision of this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on the Judiciary. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 113-844.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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 S.1696 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 S.1696 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 S.1696 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 S.1696 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.