A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
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
What this bill would do
This bill, called the "Restoring Safeguards for Dangerous Abortion Drugs Act," requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to replace the current risk evaluation and mitigation strategy for mifepristone with the one approved in June 2011. It prevents the Secretary from approving any different strategy for the drug. The bill also creates a federal tort allowing individuals to sue certain entities for bodily injury or mental health harm resulting from the use of mifepristone imported or transported in violation of specific laws. Additionally, it amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to ban the importation of mifepristone into the United States, including via mail.
Yes
- Scored +6
Does this give the federal government more power?
Expands federal authority by creating a new federal tort and a national ban on importation.
- Scored +2
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
Provides a legal path for individuals to seek damages for bodily or mental harm caused by illegally imported medication.
- Scored +1
Does this tighten control of the border?
Bans the importation of mifepristone into the United States.
The opposite· 3 of 26
- Scored -9
Does this make abortion easier to get?
Severely restricts access to mifepristone by banning importation and reinstating a more restrictive distribution strategy.
- Scored -8
Would women be better off under this?
Significantly restricts access to abortion medication and limits healthcare options.
- Scored -8
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
Rural residents rely most heavily on mail-order and telehealth for abortion access.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Legal Recourse for Harm: Under Section 4, individuals who suffer bodily injury or harm to mental health (including physical, psychological, emotional, or physiological harm) due to the use of illegally imported or transported mifepristone can sue for compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney's fees.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Restricted Medication Strategy: Section 3 requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to withdraw the current risk evaluation and mitigation strategy and replace it with the June 2011 version, while prohibiting any other strategy from being approved.
-
Importation Ban: Section 5 bans any person from importing mifepristone into the United States, which specifically includes mailing the drug to individuals.
-
Liability for Providers: Section 4 makes telehealth providers, pharmacies, and persons who knowingly import or transport the drug in violation of section 1462 of title 18, United States Code, liable for damages if an individual is harmed by the medication.
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.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural residents rely most heavily on mail-order and telehealth for abortion access. Would women be better off under this? — Significantly restricts access to abortion medication and limits healthcare options. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Disproportionately impacts low-income individuals who rely on affordable mail-order or telehealth options. Would business owners be better off under this? — Increases liability risks for pharmacy and telehealth business owners. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Increases barriers for those in rural areas who rely on telehealth/mail medication. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Increases barriers to reproductive health services which disproportionately affect marginalized communities. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Increases barriers to reproductive health services which disproportionately affect marginalized communities. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Ban on importation may affect those seeking medications from abroad. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Telehealth restrictions can disproportionately affect those with mobility issues. Would students be better off under this? — Restricts access to affordable and discrete medication options. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Restricts access to abortion medication often used by this demographic. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Increases barriers to reproductive health services. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — Restricts access for individuals in this community who may require abortion services. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Restricts access to abortion medication. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Reduces availability and increases potential costs of accessing the medication. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Reduces the variety of providers (telehealth/mail) available. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Generally restricts access to the medication. Would high-income households be better off under this? — High-income individuals may still be able to travel to access the medication despite restrictions.
- Healthcare
- Does this make abortion easier to get? — Severely restricts access to mifepristone by banning importation and reinstating a more restrictive distribution strategy. Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Limits the availability of medication abortion via mail and telehealth.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this tighten control of the border? — Bans the importation of mifepristone into the United States. Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated? — Restricts reproductive healthcare options specifically available to women.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Expands federal authority by creating a new federal tort and a national ban on importation. Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — Increases legal liability for telehealth providers, potentially affecting patient-provider privacy regarding abortion care. Does this make it easier to do business across state lines? — Restricts the movement and transportation of mifepristone across state lines. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Imposes federal mandates on medication distribution and import bans that override state-level access.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Provides a legal path for individuals to seek damages for bodily or mental harm caused by illegally imported medication. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Imposes significant legal liability on pharmacies and telehealth providers through a new federal tort.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this make trade with other countries easier? — Creates a ban on the importation of a specific medical product.
- 5/6/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.