A Republican bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
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, known as the Yaeli Martinez Child Protection Act, prevents federal child welfare funds from being used to remove children from their homes or deny foster and adoptive placements based on a parent or guardian affirming a child's sex or declining to consent to sex-rejecting interventions. It establishes that parental affirmation of a child's sex does not constitute child abuse, neglect, maltreatment, or parental unfitness under federal law. The legislation places strict housing and placement restrictions based on immutable biological sex for children in foster care and state-funded residential facilities. Additionally, it creates a private right of action allowing parents, legal guardians, caregivers, and children to sue covered entities and state actors in federal court for adverse actions related to sex affirmation. Finally, the bill amends the Full Faith and Credit for Child Custody Determinations to prohibit states from taking child custody jurisdiction based on a child or contestant seeking sex-rejecting interventions.
Yes
- Scored +7
Does this protect the freedom to practise a religion?
The bill protects the rights of parents to raise their children in accordance with their religious beliefs regarding immutable biological sex.
The opposite
- Scored -6
Would children be better off under this?
The bill restricts minors in foster care from accessing certain medical and social transition interventions and housing accommodations aligned with their gender identity.
- Scored -5
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The legislation preempts state laws and restricts state child welfare jurisdiction regarding custody disputes involving sex-rejecting interventions.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Protection of Parental Rights: Section 2 and Section 115(b) protect the fundamental right of parents and legal guardians to direct the care, upbringing, and health care decisions of their children, specifically affirming their right to raise their children in a manner consistent with their biological sex without state interference.
- Prohibition on Discriminatory Child Welfare Actions: Section 102 and Section 201 ensure that foster and adoptive placements cannot be denied or delayed because a prospective parent intends to affirm a child's sex, preserving more potential homes for children in need.
- Judicial Accountability for State Agencies: Section 106 and Section 201 establish a private right of action under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act and the Social Security Act, giving parents, guardians, and children the ability to seek injunctive relief, declaratory relief, compensatory damages, and attorney's fees in federal court if they face adverse state actions.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Restrictions on Access to Specific Medical and Social Interventions: Sections 101, 102, 201, and 202 prohibit federal funds from being used to fund, facilitate, or authorize sex-rejecting interventions, and restrict facilities from using pronouns or titles that do not correspond to a child's biological sex without express parental consent, which limits access to these specific services for minors in state custody.
- Mandatory Housing and Facility Separations: Sections 101, 201, and 202 mandate that children in foster care and child-care institutions aged 4 and older must be housed in sleeping quarters, bathrooms, and locker rooms separated by immutable biological sex, which may place administrative and logistical burdens on facilities and limit placement options for certain youths.
- Loss of Federal Funding for Non-Compliant States: Sections 102, 201, and 204 require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to withhold and recover federal funds from states, tribes, or agencies that fail to enforce the restrictions and rules regarding sex affirmation and sex-rejecting interventions, potentially reducing overall resources available for state child protection programs.
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.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this protect the freedom to practise a religion? — The bill protects the rights of parents to raise their children in accordance with their religious beliefs regarding immutable biological sex.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would children be better off under this? — The bill restricts minors in foster care from accessing certain medical and social transition interventions and housing accommodations aligned with their gender identity.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The legislation preempts state laws and restricts state child welfare jurisdiction regarding custody disputes involving sex-rejecting interventions.
- 9/30/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/29/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
- 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.
Mike LeeRepublican · Utah