Christopher Smith (R-NJ)
Celebrating the historic anniversary of the June 24, 2022, decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.
A Republican resolution with 13 Republican cosponsors · See all 13 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
A House resolution is the House speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the House agrees to it, it is officially the House's word; it is not a law, so the Senate and the President have no part in it.
What this bill would do
This resolution commemorates the four-year anniversary of the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The resolution characterizes the Dobbs ruling as a correction of a grave error made in Roe v. Wade. It highlights the belief that the authority to regulate abortion should belong to the people and their elected representatives. Furthermore, the text mentions the role of pregnancy centers in helping women and families. Finally, the House of Representatives uses this resolution to commit to protecting unborn lives and supporting families.
Yes
- Scored +8
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The resolution emphasizes that the authority to regulate abortion should belong to the people and their elected representatives at the state level.
- Scored +5
Would children be better off under this?
The resolution commits to protecting the unalienable right to life and guarding unborn lives.
The opposite
- Scored -10
Does this make abortion easier to get?
The resolution celebrates the overturning of Roe v. Wade, which removes federal constitutional protections for abortion access.
- Scored -7
Would women be better off under this?
The resolution celebrates a ruling that removes reproductive autonomy and legal protections for abortion access for women.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of unborn life: The resolution commits to guarding unborn lives against lethal violence and protecting the unalienable right to life (Resolution clauses 2, 3, and 6).
-
Support for families: The resolution commits to supporting families, which includes new and expectant mothers along with their children (Resolution clause 4).
-
Assistance through pregnancy centers: The text notes that more than 2,700 pregnancy centers help meet the physical, psychological, emotional, and spiritual needs of millions of women and families (Preamble).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Undermining state laws: The text states that the mail-order abortion drug policy advanced by the Biden Administration undermines the ability of States to enforce laws enacted to protect unborn life (Preamble).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Healthcare
- Does this make abortion easier to get? — The resolution celebrates the overturning of Roe v. Wade, which removes federal constitutional protections for abortion access.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The resolution emphasizes that the authority to regulate abortion should belong to the people and their elected representatives at the state level.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would children be better off under this? — The resolution commits to protecting the unalienable right to life and guarding unborn lives. Would women be better off under this? — The resolution celebrates a ruling that removes reproductive autonomy and legal protections for abortion access for women.
- 7/9/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/24/2026
- Submitted in House
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 12 Cosponsors added.
5 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
- 119-SRES-787: A resolution celebrating the historic anniversary of the June 24, 2022, decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.
- 118-HRES-546 (not yet synced)
- 118-HRES-1311 (not yet synced)
- 118-SRES-272 (not yet synced)
- 118-SRES-739 (not yet synced)
Robert AderholtRepublican · Alabama
Sheri BiggsRepublican · South Carolina
Andrew ClydeRepublican · Georgia
Michelle FischbachRepublican · Minnesota
Clay HigginsRepublican · Louisiana
Tracey MannRepublican · Kansas
Barry MooreRepublican · Alabama
John McGuireRepublican · Virginia
Andrew OglesRepublican · Tennessee
John RoseRepublican · Tennessee
Michael SimpsonRepublican · Idaho
Marlin StutzmanRepublican · Indiana
Daniel WebsterRepublican · Florida