Conscience Shield Lets Hospitals, Insurers Refuse Abortion—and Sue States
H.R. 3411 — Conscience Protection Act of 2025 · Filed by August Pfluger (R-TX) · 16 cosponsors · Introduced May 14, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill prohibits the federal government and any entity receiving federal health funding from penalizing or discriminating against health care providers, hospitals, insurers, and pharmacies that decline to provide, refer for, or pay for abortion services. It creates a private right of action allowing individuals and entities to sue for violations, establishes enforcement mechanisms through the HHS Office for Civil Rights, and permits the Attorney General to pursue civil actions. The bill applies to dozens of existing federal conscience-protection statutes and creates new remedies—including money damages against states—for entities claiming discrimination based on abortion non-participation.
Why we flagged it
The bill's operative mechanism is a broad prohibition on federal enforcement against health care entities that refuse abortion services, coupled with a private right of action and damages against states. Although framed as protecting conscience rights, the functional effect is to restrict abortion access by immunizing providers from federal nondiscrimination law and creating financial liability for states that mandate abortion coverage.
What the text implies
- The bill's private right of action and damages remedy against state governments may create financial pressure on states to abandon abortion-coverage mandates, effectively privatizing abortion access policy and shifting control from elected legislatures to individual providers and courts.
- By defining 'health care entity' to include insurers, health plans, and pharmacies, the bill permits entities receiving any federal health funding to refuse abortion coverage or dispensing without federal penalty, potentially fragmenting insurance markets and creating geographic deserts of abortion access.
The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
religious health systems and hospitals; faith-based insurers and health plans; pharmacy chains and individual pharmacists