No Harm Act
Sponsored By: Representative Onder
Introduced
Summary
Blocks federal funding for sex‑trait altering treatments for minors. The bill would set a federal framework that forbids federal money from paying for, promoting, or supporting these treatments and adds parental‑consent rules and civil remedies to enforce that ban.
Show full summary
- Families and minors: Parents could decline these treatments and providers would need written parental consent plus a 72‑hour prior consultation and a printed list of fertility and other risks before any treatment is furnished. Minors or parents harmed by violations could sue with a 30‑year statute of limitations after the child reaches adulthood.
- Medical providers and institutions: Federal funding could be withheld from medical institutions that provide these treatments to minors. The bill would create medical malpractice liability for harms from such treatments including attorney fees and treble damages and a 30‑year statute of limitations.
- Schools and federal programs: Federal funds would be barred to elementary and secondary schools that let staff provide or support these treatments without notifying parents and getting written approval, and covered federal funds are defined to include Medicaid (Title XIX) and Part A of Title IV. The bill also authorizes civil actions by any person, including taxpayers, against the United States or federal agencies for violations and changes the criminal health‑necessity standard in a provision related to female genital mutilation.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
7 provisions identified: 3 benefits, 1 costs, 3 mixed.
Sue providers for harm to minors
If enacted, a person harmed by a sex-trait altering treatment received as a minor could sue the provider in federal court. If they win, they could receive attorney fees, litigation costs, and treble damages. They would have up to 30 years after turning 18 to file.
Federal money limits on minors' treatments
If enacted, federal money could not pay for sex-trait altering treatments for minors. Medical institutions that provide these treatments to minors could lose federal funds. States could lose Medicaid (title XIX) or TANF (part A of title IV) funds if they allow treatment without consent of both parents or separate a child only because a parent refused consent. If a State requires providers to give such treatments, any HHS funds could be withheld. Anyone, including a taxpayer, could sue the U.S. or the paying agency for violations.
Parental consent and right to decline
If enacted, providers could not treat a minor unless they meet with parents at least 72 hours before treatment, give a printed list of side effects (including fertility and sexual function risks), and get written parental consent. A parent or minor harmed by a violation could sue in federal court, with up to 30 years after the child turns 18 to file. Parents would also have the right to decline these treatments for their minor. If a State’s policy violates that right, a parent or minor could sue the U.S. and the State.
Schools need parent OK for treatments
If enacted, K–12 schools that let staff provide or support these treatments without telling parents and getting written approval could lose federal funds. Schools would need to notify parents and receive written permission before school personnel help provide the treatment.
Protections for providers who decline
If enacted, health care providers who refuse to perform, refer for, pay for, or help arrange these treatments could not be punished for that refusal. A harmed provider could sue for an injunction, a court statement of rights, or money damages.
Limits health defense in FGM cases
If enacted, the bill would say that "necessary to health" does not include gender change or affirmation in federal female genital mutilation cases. This would narrow a legal defense in prosecutions.
Defines which treatments are covered
If enacted, the bill would define sex-trait altering treatment, puberty blockers, and excepted services. It would define a minor as under 18. Some emergency care and disorders-of-sex-development services would be excepted.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Onder
MO • R
Cosponsors
Harris (MD)
MD • R
Sponsored 3/26/2025
Miller (IL)
IL • R
Sponsored 3/26/2025
Biggs (SC)
SC • R
Sponsored 3/26/2025
Messmer
IN • R
Sponsored 3/27/2025
Fry
SC • R
Sponsored 5/7/2025
Franklin, Scott
FL • R
Sponsored 5/7/2025
Clyde
GA • R
Sponsored 5/8/2025
Steube
FL • R
Sponsored 8/15/2025
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.govRelated Bills
HR21 — Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act
Mandates care and penalties for infants born alive after an abortion. This bill would set standards of care, require reporting, create criminal penalties, and allow civil suits when an infant is born alive following an abortion. - Women and families: A woman on whom an abortion is performed may sue anyone who violates the law and recover objectively verifiable medical and psychological damages, punitive damages, and statutory damages equal to three times the cost of the abortion. Courts must award reasonable attorney's fees to prevailing plaintiffs and may award fees to defendants if a suit is frivolous. - Health care practitioners and facility employees: Any practitioner present at a birth resulting from an abortion must exercise the same professional skill, care, and diligence as for any other live-born infant of the same gestational age. Practitioners or employees who know of a failure to comply must immediately report the violation to appropriate State or Federal law enforcement. - Criminal and statutory consequences: Violators face fines, up to 5 years in prison, or both, and anyone who intentionally kills a born-alive infant is punished under the murder statute. The bill also updates chapter headings and adds statutory definitions for "abortion" and "attempt."
HR1301 — Death Tax Repeal Act
This bill would repeal the federal estate tax and the generation‑skipping transfer tax. It would also reshape gift tax rules by keeping tiered rates but creating a $10 million lifetime exemption indexed for inflation. - Heirs of people who die on or after enactment would not owe the federal estate tax. This removes that tax from those estates. - Donors and high‑net‑worth individuals would still face a gift tax, but under a tiered schedule from 18% to 35% and a $10 million lifetime exemption that is indexed for inflation after 2011. - Generation‑skipping transfers made on or after enactment would not be subject to the GST tax. Qualified domestic trusts for surviving spouses of decedents who died before enactment would follow transitional rules, including changed treatment of distributions after a 10‑year period beginning on the enactment date.
HR703 — Main Street Tax Certainty Act
This bill would permanently preserve the qualified business income (QBI) deduction by removing the sunset provision in Internal Revenue Code section 199A. The change would apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025, so the deduction would be available for 2026 and later tax years. It achieves this by striking subsection (i) of section 199A and setting that effective date. Taxpayers with qualified business income would continue to claim the QBI deduction under the existing Section 199A rules for those years.
HR425 — Repealing Big Brother Overreach Act
Ends the Corporate Transparency Act and removes its amendments from federal law. It also adjusts related U.S. Code citations and parts of the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 to reflect that repeal. - Repeals the Corporate Transparency Act as title LXIV of division F of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) and removes all amendments made by that Act. - Edits Title 31, United States Code by removing or changing cross-references that mentioned section 5336 and updating references in sections 5321 and 5322. - Alters the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 by repealing section 6502 and striking or modifying portions of section 6509 as described in the bill.
HR38 — Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2025
National concealed-carry reciprocity. This bill would create nationwide recognition of state concealed-carry licenses so people with a valid photo ID and a state permit or the right to carry in their home State could carry a concealed handgun in many other States. - Gun owners and travelers: People not federally prohibited from firearms possession who hold a state concealed-carry license or are entitled to carry in their home State could carry a concealed handgun in States that issue permits or do not ban concealed carry. Machine guns and destructive devices are excluded. It would take effect 90 days after enactment. - State and property rights: States would keep the power to prohibit or restrict concealed carry on private property and on State or local government property. The bill also lists federal public lands and agencies where carrying would be allowed in publicly accessible areas, including National Park units and Forest Service land. - Criminal and civil protections: Officers may not arrest absent probable cause that the carry falls outside the law and prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt when the defense is raised. Prevailing defendants can recover reasonable attorney fees and may sue for deprivation of rights with damages.
HR1028 — Protection of Women in Olympic and Amateur Sports Act of 2026
Biological sex-based eligibility: bans male-sex individuals from female amateur competitions. The bill would add reproductive-system-based definitions of 'female', 'male', and 'sex' to Title 36 and would prohibit a person whose sex is male from participating in competitions designated for females, women, or girls. - Female athletes: It would narrow who can compete in female-designated amateur events by tying eligibility to reproductive-system definitions of sex. - Transgender and intersex athletes: People whose sex is defined as male under the bill would be barred from female competitions, with the definitions referencing developmental or genetic anomalies. - Amateur sports organizations: Governing bodies would follow new statutory definitions when setting eligibility rules for amateur competitions.
Take It Personal
Get Your Personalized Policy View
Create a free account to save research, track policy impacts, and unlock your personalized versions of these pages.
Already have an account? Sign in