A Democratic bill with 40 Democratic cosponsors · See all 41 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
The "Right to Contraception Act" establishes a statutory right for individuals to access and use contraceptives without coercion. It also grants health care providers the right to provide contraceptives, information, and related services. This Act aims to prevent any government or state law from restricting the sale, provision, or use of these services. It seeks to protect an individual's ability to make decisions regarding their medical care and family life. Finally, the bill includes enforcement mechanisms to challenge laws that infringe upon these rights.
Yes· 3 of 18
- Scored +8
Would women be better off under this?
The bill protects a fundamental right to reproductive health and decision-making central to women's well-being.
- Scored +8
Does this make health care easier to get in general?
The act establishes a statutory right to access and obtain contraceptives and related information.
- Scored +7
Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated?
The act protects the ability of individuals to make decisions about their reproductive health and family life.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of Access: The bill establishes a statutory right for individuals to obtain contraceptives and engage in contraception free from coercion (Section 5(a)).
-
Support for Health Care Providers: Health care providers are granted the right to provide contraceptives, information, referrals, and related services (Section s 5(a)).
-
Prevention of Restrictions: The Act prohibits the Federal Government and States from enforcing laws that restrict the sale or use of contraceptives or that make it more difficult to obtain them (Section 6(a)(2)).
-
Legal Recourse for Violations: Individuals or entities negatively affected by violations of this Act can file civil actions in court (Section 8(b)).
-
Financial Protection in Litigation: Prevailing plaintiffs in legal actions brought under this Act are entitled to receive litigation costs and reasonable attorney's fees (Section 8(d)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Limitations on Insurance Coverage Regulations: This Act does not supersede or affect Federal laws regarding coverage under group health plans, individual health insurance coverage, or Federal health care programs (Section 6(c)).
-
Scope of Authority: The Act does not limit the authority of the Secretary of Health and Human Services to approve, clear, authorize, or license contraceptives (Section 5(d)).
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 women be better off under this? — The bill protects a fundamental right to reproductive health and decision-making central to women's well-being. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — The bill explicitly addresses the need to protect against the history of reproductive coercion experienced by Black women. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — The bill includes protections for people regardless of gender identity and sexual orientation. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill specifically aims to protect access for people paid low wages who face higher barriers to care. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — The bill includes protections for immigrants and people of color as a core purpose. Would immigrants be better off under this? — The bill explicitly lists protection for immigrants as a component of its social equity goals. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — The bill recognizes people with disabilities as a group that faces unique barriers to healthcare access. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The bill aims to improve access for people living in rural and underserved areas. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — The bill protects access to contraception which is essential for reproductive autonomy in young adulthood.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated? — The act protects the ability of individuals to make decisions about their reproductive health and family life. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The bill seeks to protect access to contraception for historically marginalized groups including Black, indigenous, and other people of color. Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — The bill includes people with disabilities as a group that faces particular barriers to reproductive healthcare access. Does this expand the rights of LGBTQ people? — The bill explicitly includes protections for people regardless of gender identity and sexual orientation. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — The bill notes that contraception allows people to participate more equally in economic and social life.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — The bill protects a fundamental right central to an individual's privacy and bodily autonomy. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill uses federal authority to supersede state laws that restrict access to contraception.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — The act establishes a statutory right to access and obtain contraceptives and related information. Does this strengthen the Affordable Care Act? — The bill protects access to contraceptive services which are a key component of the preventative care provisions in the ACA.
- 6/12/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/12/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/5/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- 39 Cosponsors added.
- 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.
Angela AlsobrooksDemocrat · Maryland
Tammy BaldwinDemocrat · Wisconsin
Michael BennetDemocrat · Colorado
Richard BlumenthalDemocrat · Connecticut
Cory BookerDemocrat · New Jersey
Lisa Blunt RochesterDemocrat · Delaware
Maria CantwellDemocrat · Washington
Christopher CoonsDemocrat · Delaware
Catherine Cortez MastoDemocrat · Nevada
Richard DurbinDemocrat · Illinois
Tammy DuckworthDemocrat · Illinois
John FettermanDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Kirsten GillibrandDemocrat · New York
Ruben GallegoDemocrat · Arizona
John HickenlooperDemocrat · Colorado
Mazie HironoDemocrat · Hawaii
Martin HeinrichDemocrat · New Mexico
Amy KlobucharDemocrat · Minnesota
Timothy KaineDemocrat · Virginia
Andy KimDemocrat · New Jersey
Ben LujánDemocrat · New Mexico
Patty MurrayDemocrat · Washington
Christopher MurphyDemocrat · Connecticut
Jeff MerkleyDemocrat · Oregon
Jon OssoffDemocrat · Georgia
Alex PadillaDemocrat · California
Gary PetersDemocrat · Michigan
John ReedDemocrat · Rhode Island
Jacky RosenDemocrat · Nevada
Bernie SandersIndependent · Vermont
Jeanne ShaheenDemocrat · New Hampshire
Brian SchatzDemocrat · Hawaii
Tina SmithDemocrat · Minnesota
Elissa SlotkinDemocrat · Michigan
Chris Van HollenDemocrat · Maryland
Ron WydenDemocrat · Oregon
Raphael WarnockDemocrat · Georgia
Peter WelchDemocrat · Vermont
Sheldon WhitehouseDemocrat · Rhode Island
Mark WarnerDemocrat · Virginia
Elizabeth WarrenDemocrat · Massachusetts