Congress targets abortion funding for undocumented immigrants only
H.R. 6191 — No Taxpayer Funded Abortion Travel for Illegal Aliens Act · Filed by Mark Harris (R-NC) · 35 cosponsors · Introduced Nov 20, 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 federal funds from being used to help undocumented immigrants access abortion services, including travel, lodging, meals, childcare, translation, doula care, and patient education. It does not ban abortion itself or restrict access for U.S. citizens or legal residents; it narrows the pool of people eligible for federally funded abortion-related support to exclude those classified as deportable or inadmissible under immigration law.
Why we flagged it
The bill's operative mechanism is a funding prohibition targeting a narrow population (undocumented immigrants) seeking abortion services. It is not primarily about abortion policy writ large, but rather about restricting federal support for a specific immigration-status category. The title accurately reflects this intersection.
What the text implies
- The definition of 'covered abortion services' is unusually broad, capturing not just the abortion procedure itself but all logistical support (travel, meals, childcare, translation, doula). This may effectively bar federal funding for any abortion-adjacent assistance to undocumented immigrants, even if the underlying abortion is legal in the state where it occurs.
- The bill does not specify which federal programs are affected (Medicaid, HHS grants, etc.), leaving ambiguity about enforcement scope and whether existing state-level abortion funding for undocumented immigrants (where permitted) would be preempted.
The full analysis lists 3 implications of this text.
Who it affects
The bill restricts federal funding for a specific population (undocumented immigrants) seeking abortion services, which narrows reproductive autonomy and access for that group; however, it does not affect U.S. citizens or legal residents, and the underlying question of whether federal funds should support abortion travel for any population remains contested across the electorate.