WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SF 180

Highway obstruction action for damages and civil penalties imposition

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Julia Coleman and 4 co-sponsors

Protects individuals who refuse medical services on conscience grounds when service is a countermeasure or under FDA emergency use, shielding them from penalties or discrimination.

Referred to Judiciary and Public Safety
#highways #roads #andbridges #liability
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 180

SF 180 — Summary of Provisions (Medical service refusal for reasons of conscience)

Note: The bill information provided shows SF 180 with a version that adds a new section on medical service refusal for reasons of conscience. While the bill’s overall title references highway obstruction and civil penalties, the introduced content centers on conscience-based refusals to medical services and related protections.

Purpose and intent

  • Create statutory protections for individuals who refuse certain medical services on grounds of conscience (including religious beliefs) when such services are declared countermeasures or have emergency use authorizations.
  • Ensure that a refusal based on conscience cannot be used to punish or discriminate against the individual by employers, service providers, public entities, or other actors.

Key provisions (new Section 139A.27)

  1. Definitions

    • “Medical service” means a biological or pharmaceutical product or related medical product, including biologics, vaccines, drugs, medical devices, gene therapies, DNA- or RNA-based products.
    • “Political subdivision” aligns with the definition in section 145A.2.
    • “Public official” includes officers, employees, agents, or entities of state government or political subdivisions (agency, board, commission, office, department, etc.).

  2. Conscience-based refusal

    • If a medical service has been declared a countermeasure under the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (or if the FDA has issued an emergency use authorization for the service), an individual may refuse the medical service for reasons of conscience, including religious convictions.

  3. Protections against penalty or discrimination

    • An individual who refuses a medical service under subsection 2 shall not be subjected to:
      • Denial or termination of employment by an employer.
      • Denial of services, including public services.
      • Denial of access to commerce.
      • Segregation of the individual.
      • Penalization or financial coercion by any entity.
      • Discrimination, including imposing burdens or requirements.

Who is affected

  • Individuals who refuse certain medical services for reasons of conscience.
  • Employers, health care providers, businesses, political subdivisions, public officials, and other entities that might otherwise impose employment actions, service restrictions, or other penalties.
  • State government and political subdivisions (per the defined terms).

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Triggering conditions: The protections apply when the medical service has been declared a countermeasure under the PREP Act or has FDA emergency use authorization.
  • Introduced: February 3, 2025.
  • Status: Referred to Judiciary and Public Safety.
  • Sponsors: ALONS (primary).
  • Related companion bill: HF 367.
  • Legislative actions timeline (highlights):
    • 2025-03-26: Passed Senate (yeas 32, nays 15); immediate message.
    • 2025-04-01 to 2025-04-02: Subcommittee and committee work; passage recommended.
    • 2025-04-02: Committee report recommending passage; placed on calendar.
    • 2025-04-10: Placed on calendar under unfinished business.
    • 2025-05-15: Re-referred to Judiciary.
  • The bill has progressed through subcommittees and committees and has moved between the Senate and House (companion HF 367 referenced).

Potential impact

  • Strengthens civil protections for individuals who refuse certain medical services on conscience grounds, particularly in contexts involving countermeasures or emergency-use authorizations.
  • Limits penalties or coercive actions by employers, service providers, or government entities against individuals who exercise conscience-based refusals.
  • Could interact with public health emergency policies and federal emergency use authorizations; state-level protections may influence workplace and service provision practices during such scenarios.

Related information

  • Companion bill: HF 367.
  • Definitions and language are specific to “medical service” as broad as biologics, vaccines, drugs, devices, gene/DNA/RNA therapies.
  • The bill emphasizes non-discrimination rather than enacting new mandates; it focuses on prohibiting punitive actions against conscience-based refusals.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.