The Ultrasounds Save Lives Act of 2025 mandates that abortion providers perform an ultrasound, share the results, and obtain informed consent at least 24 hours prior to performing an abortion, subject to civil penalties and private lawsuits for non-compliance.
Mary Miller
Representative
IL-15
The Ultrasounds Save Lives Act of 2025 mandates that abortion providers perform an ultrasound and obtain signed informed consent at least 24 hours before performing an abortion. The bill outlines specific disclosure requirements regarding fetal development and medical risks, while establishing civil penalties and private rights of action for providers who fail to comply. Exceptions are provided only for documented medical emergencies.
The Ultrasounds Save Lives Act of 2025 introduces a strict federal framework for informed consent that every abortion provider in the country must follow. Under this bill, a provider cannot perform an abortion without first conducting an ultrasound, sharing the results with the patient, and waiting at least 24 hours after a specific, in-person meeting where the patient signs a detailed authorization form. This form isn't just a standard medical waiver; it must include the fetus's exact gestational age, a list of medical risks, and descriptions of developmental features like heartbeats or facial features (Section 2). For a patient, this means a minimum of two separate in-person visits to a clinic—a requirement that could be a significant hurdle for someone working an hourly job or living in a rural area hours away from the nearest facility.
The bill’s 24-hour rule is a hard line. A provider must present the consent form in person at least one full day before any part of the procedure begins. While the bill allows this to happen at the same time as state-mandated disclosures, it adds a layer of federal oversight that could complicate scheduling for both patients and staff. For example, a construction worker or a retail manager who has to travel across state lines for care would now be legally required to secure lodging or make two long-distance trips because of the mandatory pause between the ultrasound and the procedure. The only way around this is a "reasonable medical judgment" that a delay would cause death or irreversible physical harm; notably, the bill explicitly excludes psychological or emotional distress from these emergency exceptions (Section 2).
This legislation puts abortion providers under a microscope with heavy financial consequences for administrative errors. If the Attorney General finds a provider knowingly skipped a step—like failing to describe fetal organ development or missing a witness signature—the fines start at $100,000 to $150,000 for a first offense. Subsequent violations jump to a minimum of $150,001 (Section 2). Beyond government fines, the bill opens the door for private lawsuits. A patient, or the parents of a minor patient, can sue a provider for physical or psychological injuries, with the potential to win triple the cost of the abortion plus punitive damages. While the bill protects the woman from being fined or sued by the government, she could be on the hook for the provider’s legal fees if a court deems her private lawsuit "frivolous."
The bill uses broad definitions that could impact how medicine is practiced day-to-day. An "attempt" to perform an abortion is defined as any "substantial step," and "performing" includes writing a prescription for abortion-inducing drugs. This means the 24-hour clock and ultrasound requirements apply just as strictly to medication-based abortions as they do to surgical ones. For a small clinic already struggling with staffing, the threat of a $250,000 fine for a paperwork slip-up or a disagreement over what constitutes a "developmental characteristic" could be enough to make them reconsider offering these services at all. The bill clarifies that it doesn't replace state laws but rather sets a federal floor; if a state has even stricter rules, those still apply.