Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) joined 29 fellow Democrats in reintroducing legislation that would make in-vitro fertilization (IVF) a federally protected procedure, overriding state authority. The “Protect IVF Act” seeks to guarantee nationwide access to IVF services, providers, and insurance coverage—regardless of state laws that may restrict such practices.
The bill prevents states from banning IVF and responds directly to last year’s Alabama Supreme Court ruling, which temporarily halted IVF procedures in the state. Rosen declared, “No family should have to fear losing access to IVF,” framing the legislation as a matter of reproductive freedom and “basic human dignity.”
This marks the second attempt to pass the legislation. Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) first introduced it in 2024, but it failed to advance. Duckworth challenged former President Donald Trump to urge Republicans to support the bill, accusing GOP lawmakers of offering only “lip-service” to pro-IVF positions. Trump, by contrast, signed an executive order earlier this year aimed at reducing IVF costs, signaling support for the procedure without endorsing federal mandates.
Pro-life organizations remain firmly opposed to the bill. Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America condemned the proposal as a “sweeping-anything-goes bill” that could codify controversial practices like human cloning and genetic manipulation. Critics warn the bill overrides state-level protections for unborn life and would restrict states from enacting ethical limitations on embryo handling.
Supporters, including RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association, the Human Rights Campaign, and Indivisible, argue the bill is necessary for individuals seeking to build families through fertility treatments. These groups emphasize the emotional and financial challenges faced by those struggling with infertility and promote the bill as a “pro-family” solution.
The legislation underscores growing tensions between federal authority and state sovereignty on moral and medical issues. While Democrats pitch the bill as a reproductive rights safeguard, opponents see it as an assault on the rights of unborn children and a gateway to ethically unregulated biotech experimentation.
