The CCPA was first introduced in the US Congress in the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s. In each instance, the CCPA passed at least one house of Congress. However, the CCPA failed to become law because the President did not sign it, or both houses did not pass it.
The CCPA was again introduced in the Senate in 2017. However, the bill was never submitted to the full Senate for a vote.
The CCPA was introduced again in the Senate in 2019. The bill passed in July 2021.
The legislation called the Child Custody Protection Act (CCPA) was passed in the United States Congress. The bill intends to prevent an adult, other than a parent or legal guardian, from transporting a minor across state lines to obtain an abortion.
By a 276/159 vote, the US House of Delegates approved the CCPA. The legislation was promoted by social conservatives within the Republican party and only affects a small number of abortion-seekers. The legislation criminalizes anyone who helps a minor travel to another state to avoid parental involvement in an abortion. Grandparents, siblings, members of a church, or medical professionals cannot transport a minor across state lines to obtain an abortion unless they are the minor’s legal guardian.
The House version was approved on April 27, 2005. Unlike the Senate bill, the House version includes criminal and civil penalties for doctors who knowingly perform an abortion on a minor who has been transported across state lines.
During the debate on the bill, two amendments were offered. The first amendment was offered by Senator Frank Lautenberg from New Jersey. The amendment was defeated, 48-51. The amendment would have attached language of the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Act (TPPA) to the bill. The TPPA language would have allowed the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to make grants to states, non-profits, and educational agencies for abstinence and sex education. The grants would have included information about contraception and sexually transmitted diseases, along with activities designed to support healthy adolescent development.
Opposition to the first amendment argued that it is not in the best interests of young people to be sexually active outside of marriage.
The second amendment, offered by Senator Barbara Boxer from California, was approved 98-0. The amendment prohibits a parent of a legal guardian from suing the person or persons who transported a minor across states if the parent or legal guardian has committed an incestuous act with the minor.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who voted for the second amendment, argued that pregnant minors who cannot confide in parents are left with few options. She argued that few young women have the tools to navigate our complex legal system. She continued that the legal system has demands that further restrict a girl’s access. For example, she said, court hours are usually 9 to 5, requiring young women to miss school or work to appear in court. Continuing, Feinstein argued that many girls are reluctant to discuss such a personal decision involving traumatic experiences with a judge.
Some say the bill will cause more young women to deal with pregnancy crises independently. Critics of the bill raise several constitutional issues beyond the abortion issue. Parental involvement proponents argue that parents of minors have a right to decide what medical treatment their daughters can access.
Opponents argue that no state requires parental consent before a minor obtain contraceptive services, prenatal care, sexually transmitted diseases services, or treatment for alcohol or drug abuse. Opponents of the bill have argued that it fails to strengthen families because it targets extended family members.
Many states have parental notification laws. These laws require a minor female who seeks an abortion first to notify one or both parents. If one or both parents refuse to consent to prevent the minor from obtaining the abortion, these states allow for a “judicial bypass” procedure.
Under this procedure, a minor whose parents do not consent to the abortion may receive court approval to obtain the abortion.
A minor seeking a judicial bypass must make the request to a judge. The judge considers several factors, including:
Judges are given wide discretion in deciding whether to grant the request. Under state laws, judges must act on the request within a narrow time frame. A minor may appeal a decision denying the request to a higher court in the state.
Generally, minors who seek an abortion may cross state lines to obtain the abortion. A minor female with an accompanying adult may generally cross state lines from a state with a parental notification law to a state with no parental notification law.
Once the minor crosses state lines, she and the adult are no longer subject to her home state’s parental notification law. Instead, she is subject to the abortion laws of the state to which she has traveled. Since those laws do not require parental notification, the minor may obtain an abortion without such notification.
The elements of a CCPA violation are as follows:
If all elements are present, the adult may be punished through fines, a jail term of a year or less, or both.
The abortion performed in the non-home state may be necessary to save the minor’s life. The adult who transported the minor will not be penalized in such cases. “Necessary to save the life of the minor” means the life of the minor was endangered by:
Yes. An adult who transported the minor may have a defense to prosecution if the adult shows:
Under the CCPA, neither a parent nor the minor is subject to prosecution. Only the adult who takes the minor across state lines is prosecuted.
If you seek a judicial bypass, you should consider contacting a child custody lawyer if possible. An experienced family law attorney can explain the judicial bypass procedure and represent you during court proceedings.
Use LegalMatch’s services today to find a family lawyer near you. Our services are 100% confidential, and there is no fee to schedule a consultation.
16 people have successfully posted their cases
