Protect Children’s Innocence Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 3492
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Crime and Law Enforcement
- Status
- Passed House
- Latest Action
- 2025-12-18: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2026-02-04T05:06:14Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The "Protect Children's Innocence Act" (H.R. 3492) aims to protect minors under 18 from non-medically necessary genital or bodily mutilation and chemical castration by criminalizing these acts at the federal level. It expands protections beyond existing laws focused solely on female genital mutilation (FGM) to include procedures related to changing a person's body to align with a sex different from their biological sex at birth.
Key Provisions
- Criminalized Acts:
- Performing or attempting genital or bodily mutilation on a minor (up to 10 years imprisonment, fine, or both).
- Chemically castrating a minor (same penalties).
- Facilitating, consenting to, or transporting a minor for FGM (same penalties).
- Jurisdictional Scope: Applies if the act involves interstate or foreign commerce (e.g., travel, payments, communications, or tools across state lines), occurs on federal lands, or affects interstate commerce.
- Defenses and Prohibitions:
- No defense if the act is claimed as a religious, cultural, or traditional practice.
- Victims (minors) cannot be prosecuted or arrested under this law.
- Exceptions (non-violations):
- Medically necessary procedures by licensed practitioners to protect physical health (excluding mental, emotional, or behavioral issues).
- Specific cases like intersex conditions (e.g., atypical chromosomes or hormones), infections from prior procedures, imminent physical danger, or precocious puberty treatment to normalize development.
- For FGM, limited to medical needs during labor or birth by qualified personnel.
- Definitions:
- Genital or Bodily Mutilation: Includes FGM (e.g., removal or injury to external female genitalia for non-medical reasons) and surgeries to change the body to a different sex from biological sex (e.g., castration, hysterectomy, vaginoplasty, mastectomy, facial feminization/masculinization, or implants for such purposes).
- Chemical Castration: Administering drugs like puberty blockers (GnRH analogues), high-dose testosterone to biological females, or high-dose estrogen to biological males to alter sex characteristics.
- Biological Sex: Classification as male or female at birth based on reproductive system (sperm or egg production).
- Minor: Anyone under 18.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Replaces the prior version of 18 U.S.C. § 116, which only addressed FGM (female genital mutilation) performed on or involving minors in interstate commerce.
- Broadens the law to cover a wider range of "bodily mutilation" (including gender-affirming surgeries like phalloplasty or breast implants) and introduces "chemical castration" (e.g., hormone therapies or puberty blockers) as federal crimes when performed on minors.
- Adds detailed exceptions for medical necessities and specific conditions, which were not as explicitly outlined before.
- Updates the table of contents for Chapter 7 of Title 18 to reflect the new title and scope.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: Increases workload for the Department of Justice (DOJ) and federal law enforcement to investigate and prosecute cases involving interstate elements; may require coordination with state authorities on medical and child welfare issues.
- On Citizens: Restricts access to certain medical procedures for minors, potentially limiting options for families seeking gender-affirming care; protects minors from non-essential interventions but could lead to legal risks for parents, guardians, or doctors involved in such care.
- On International Relations: Applies to foreign commerce, so it could affect U.S. involvement in cases of minors transported across borders for prohibited procedures; may influence diplomatic discussions on global child protection standards, particularly regarding FGM in other countries.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Minors: Primary beneficiaries as protected from certain procedures, but transgender or gender-diverse youth may face barriers to care.
- Parents and Guardians: Could face prosecution for consenting to or facilitating prohibited acts.
- Healthcare Providers: Licensed doctors, midwives, or practitioners risk federal charges unless procedures meet strict medical exceptions; shifts focus to physical health over mental health needs.
- LGBTQ+ Community and Advocacy Groups: Directly impacted by restrictions on gender-affirming treatments for minors.
- Law Enforcement and Prosecutors: Tasked with enforcing the law, particularly in interstate cases.
- Cultural or Religious Communities: Affected by the prohibition on using tradition or religion as a defense, especially for FGM practices.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal Implications: Establishes federal criminal penalties that may preempt or conflict with varying state laws on medical procedures for minors; the broad definitions could lead to litigation over what constitutes "medically necessary" versus prohibited acts, with victims shielded from prosecution to encourage reporting.
- Constitutional Implications: Relies on the Commerce Clause (U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8) for federal jurisdiction, which has been upheld for similar interstate crimes but could face challenges if seen as overreaching into personal medical decisions or parental rights (protected under the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause). The ban on religious or cultural defenses might raise Free Exercise Clause (1st Amendment) concerns, though courts have previously allowed limits on harmful practices.
- Political Implications: Positions the law as child protection but is likely to spark debate on transgender rights versus safeguarding minors from irreversible procedures; could influence broader policy on healthcare, gender identity, and federal versus state authority in sensitive areas.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Greene, Marjorie Taylor [R-GA-14]
Cosponsors (44)
Rep. Crane, Elijah [R-AZ-2], Rep. Finstad, Brad [R-MN-1], Rep. Luna, Anna Paulina [R-FL-13], Rep. Bice, Stephanie I. [R-OK-5], Rep. Miller, Mary E. [R-IL-15], Rep. Crenshaw, Dan [R-TX-2], Rep. McGuire, John J. [R-VA-5], Rep. Kustoff, David [R-TN-8], Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5], Rep. Burlison, Eric [R-MO-7], Rep. Tenney, Claudia [R-NY-24], Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3], Rep. Brecheen, Josh [R-OK-2], Rep. Nehls, Troy E. [R-TX-22], Rep. Weber, Randy K. Sr. [R-TX-14], Rep. Harris, Andy [R-MD-1], Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6], Rep. Hern, Kevin [R-OK-1], Rep. Collins, Mike [R-GA-10], Rep. Ogles, Andrew [R-TN-5], Rep. Babin, Brian [R-TX-36], Rep. Clyde, Andrew S. [R-GA-9], Rep. De La Cruz, Monica [R-TX-15], Rep. Hageman, Harriet M. [R-WY-At Large], Rep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4], Rep. Palmer, Gary J. [R-AL-6], Rep. Timmons, William R. [R-SC-4], Rep. Norman, Ralph [R-SC-5], Rep. Miller, Max L. [R-OH-7], Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17], Rep. Jackson, Ronny [R-TX-13], Rep. Moore, Riley M. [R-WV-2], Rep. Comer, James [R-KY-1], Rep. Gill, Brandon [R-TX-26], Rep. Baird, James R. [R-IN-4], Rep. McDowell, Addison P. [R-NC-6], Rep. Harshbarger, Diana [R-TN-1], Rep. Gooden, Lance [R-TX-5], Rep. Rulli, Michael A. [R-OH-6], Rep. Guest, Michael [R-MS-3], Rep. Moore, Barry [R-AL-1], Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1], Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-9], Rep. Hinson, Ashley [R-IA-2]
Recent Actions
- 2025-12-18: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2025-12-17: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- 2025-12-17: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 216 - 211 (Roll no. 351). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H5992-5993) (Roll call 351)
- 2025-12-17: Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 216 - 211 (Roll no. 351). (Roll call 351)
- 2025-12-17: On motion to recommit Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 210 - 218 (Roll no. 350). (Roll call 350)
- 2025-12-17: Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6008-6009)
- 2025-12-17: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 3492, the Chair put the question on motion to recommit and by voice vote announced the noes had prevailed. Ms. Balint demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
- 2025-12-17: The previous question on the motion to recommit was ordered pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX.
- 2025-12-17: Ms. Balint moved to recommit to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text: CR H5999-6000)
- 2025-12-17: The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
- 2025-12-17: DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 3492.
- 2025-12-17: Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6703, H.R. 498 and H.R. 3492. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 6703 and H.R. 498 under a closed rule and H.R. 3492 under a structured rule with one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.
- 2025-12-17: Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 953. (consideration: CR H5992-6000)
- 2025-12-17: Rule H. Res. 953 passed House.
- 2025-12-17: Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 953 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6703, H.R. 498 and H.R. 3492. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 6703 and H.R. 498 under a closed rule and H.R. 3492 under a structured rule with one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.
Bill Versions
- Protect Children’s Innocence Act — issued 2025-12-17 — PDF (12 pages)
- Protect Children’s Innocence Act of 2025 — issued 2025-05-19 — PDF (9 pages)
- Protect Children’s Innocence Act — issued 2025-12-18 — PDF (11 pages)
- Protect Children’s Innocence Act — issued 2025-09-26 — PDF (12 pages)