Bill
HB 2453
Expands civil protections by classifying nonconsensual removal or continued use of a barrier like a condom as gender‑related violence under the Illinois Gender Violence Act.
Status and procedural history
- Introduced 02/04/2025 by Rep. Maura Hirschauer. Co‑sponsor added: Rep. Katie Stuart (03/05/2025).
- Referred to Rules Committee (Rule 19(a)), assigned to Judiciary — Civil / State Affairs in subsequent steps. Current status as of 03/21/2025: Re‑referred to Rules Committee.
- Companion/related measures: SB 2980 and HB 143.
Purpose / intent
- To amend the Illinois Gender Violence Act’s definition of “gender‑related violence” to expressly include certain nonconsensual sexual conduct involving the removal (or continued sex after removal) of a condom or other sexually protective device (commonly referred to as “stealthing”) and similar scenarios where a protective device is unintentionally removed but the other party continues sexual activity without the partner’s knowledge or consent. The change recognizes this conduct as a form of sex discrimination entitling victims to civil remedies under the Act.
Key provisions
- Adds subsections (2.1) and (2.2) to the Gender Violence Act definition of “gender‑related violence,” covering:
- Intentional removal of a sexually protective device by the defendant without the plaintiff’s consent, followed by sexual contact/continuation.
- Unintentional removal of a sexually protective device where the defendant knows (or becomes aware) it was removed but continues sexual contact without obtaining consent from the now‑unaware plaintiff.
- Defines “sexually protective device” to include: internal/external condoms, spermicide, diaphragm, cervical cap, contraceptive sponge, dental dam, or another physical barrier device intended to prevent pregnancy or sexually transmitted infection (STI).
- Explicitly excludes intrauterine devices (IUDs) and hormonal birth control methods from this definition.
- Retains that “gender‑related violence” also covers acts that meet elements of battery, physical intrusion of a sexual nature under coercive conditions, domestic violence (per the Victims' Economic Security and Safety Act), and threats causing realistic apprehension.
- Clarifies “workplace” to include employer premises and certain off‑premises employer‑sponsored events.
Who is affected
- Survivors of nonconsensual condom removal or continued sexual activity after a protective device is removed (victims can seek civil relief under the Gender Violence Act).
- Individuals accused of such conduct may face civil liability (regardless of whether criminal charges are filed).
- Employers and workplaces: expanded definitional scope of the Act and workplace inclusion may affect employer responsibilities, anti‑discrimination enforcement, and workplace policies.
- Health/education stakeholders: may affect public messaging, training, and consent education.
Potential impact and considerations
- Expands civil protections and legal remedies for victims of “stealthing” and related conduct by framing it as sex discrimination/gender‑related violence.
- Because the Act is civil (not necessarily criminal), victims can pursue damages, injunctions, and other remedies regardless of criminal proceedings.
- The statutory language will likely generate litigation over factual issues such as knowledge, consent, and what constitutes “intentional” versus “unintentional” removal and the timing of awareness.
- Exclusion of IUDs and hormonal methods focuses the law on barrier devices and similar physical barriers intended to prevent pregnancy or STIs.
Note on submitted materials
- The file provided also included unrelated text from an Arizona bill titled “defensive driving schools” (Arizona HB 2453). This summary pertains only to the Illinois HB2453 amending the Gender Violence Act.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
