PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 16, 2023
Conscience Objections to Negligent State COVID-19 Inoculation Edicts Need Constitutional Enforcement Act of 2023 or the CONSCIENCE Act of 2023
This bill generally prohibits state and local governmental COVID-19 vaccine mandates that do not provide religious exemptions.
Specifically, the bill prohibits state and local governments from establishing COVID-19 vaccine mandates that (1) place a substantial burden on the religious exercise of an individual or entity; (2) do not treat a religious exercise or condition the same as a nonreligious exercise or condition; or (3) exclude or unreasonably limit religious exemptions. An individual's refusal to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, or an entity's refusal to institute COVID-19 vaccine requirements, on the basis of a sincerely held religious belief is considered to be religious exercise.
The bill establishes a private right of action and authorizes the federal government to bring civil actions for violations.
The bill applies to any mandates adopted before, on, or after the bill's date of enactment.
People & committees
Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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.492 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.492 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.492 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.492 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.