WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2617

Relating to warrantless entry of private lands

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Jim Butler and 8 co-sponsors

Prohibits coercing abortion; requires private screening and conspicuous clinic notices; imposes criminal/civil penalties, mandatory reporting, and licensing action for violators.

To House Judiciary
#naturalresources
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2617

Summary — HB 2617: “Coercive Abuse Against Mothers Prevention Act”

Status: Referred to Rules Committee. Introduced: early February 2025 (document lists Feb. 6 and Feb. 10, 2025). Jurisdiction: text in the packet is drafted for Illinois (104th General Assembly) and names Rep. Adam M. Niemerg; the packet also contains unrelated material from an Arizona HB 2617. Verify state/sponsor before taking action.

Main purpose

To prohibit coercing or forcing a pregnant woman to have an abortion, to require certain notices and screenings at reproductive health care facilities, and to establish criminal, civil, and professional-reporting consequences for perpetrators, non‑reporting mandatory reporters, and facilities or providers who violate the Act.

Key provisions

  • Criminal prohibition: It is illegal to coerce or force a pregnant woman to have an abortion. The synopsis states penalties for a person who coerces/forces an abortion as a petty offense with a $500 fine and a business offense with a $1,500 fine (text lists those fine amounts).
  • Civil remedies: A pregnant woman injured by an abuser’s violation may bring a civil suit to recover damages regardless of whether criminal prosecution occurs and regardless of whether she has an abortion. A woman injured by a facility’s violation may also sue.
  • Definitions: Detailed definitions include “abuser,” “coercion,” “coerce/force an abortion” (covers threats or acts such as physical harm, confinement, threats to revoke scholarships, threaten discharge or alter employment terms, deny social assistance, or remove financial support/housing from dependents), and exclusions (does not cover constitutionally protected speech or expressions of conscience).
  • Mandatory reporting: A broad list of “mandatory reporters” (physicians, nurses, physician assistants, medical staff, emergency personnel, and any employee/staff/volunteer at a reproductive health care facility) must personally report every instance of alleged or suspected coerced abortion to the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) or local law enforcement in the county where the facility is located.
  • Clinical screening duty: An attending health care professional must orally ask a pregnant woman, in a private room and without anyone accompanying her, whether she is being coerced or forced to have an abortion.
  • Penalties for non‑reporting and professional consequences: Any mandatory reporter who willfully and knowingly fails to report suspected coercion/force/attempted or threatened coercion is guilty of a business offense with a $5,000 fine. Health care professionals who willfully violate mandatory reporting are to be referred to the Illinois State Medical Board (or appropriate board) for potential license suspension or revocation.
  • Facility notices: Reproductive health care facilities must conspicuously post specified signs and information visible to persons entering waiting, consultation, and procedure rooms (the bill text is truncated and does not reproduce the exact sign language in the packet).
  • Effective date: 90 days after becoming law (per synopsis).

Who would be affected

  • Pregnant women seeking care at reproductive health care facilities (greater screening and notice provision).
  • Individuals who coerce, threaten, or force abortions (criminal fines and civil liability).
  • Reproductive health care facilities and staff (posting, screening, reporting obligations; civil liability for violations).
  • Mandatory reporters (expanded reporting duties; potential fines and professional discipline for willful non‑compliance).
  • State agencies (DCFS and local law enforcement may receive increased reports; licensing board(s) may receive referrals).

Anticipated impacts and implementation considerations

  • Operational impacts on clinics: new signage, staff training, private screening procedures, and reporting workflows.
  • Potential increase in DCFS and law‑enforcement referrals and civil litigation.
  • Need to clarify interplay with existing patient‑privacy/confidentiality rules and with other state reproductive‑health statutes (the bill cross‑references the Reproductive Health Act for the definition of “abortion”).
  • Because the packet contains an unrelated Arizona bill text and a different sponsors list, confirm the bill’s jurisdiction, sponsor(s), and final text before reliance.

If you want, I can:
- Pull the full, final bill text (if you give me the state or a link), or
- Draft a short one‑page explainer for clinic administrators outlining compliance steps.

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

Sign in to ask a question.