June 24, 2026
Ms. Pettersen submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the monitoring and regulation of water systems not be weaponized for the purposes of surveilling, tracking, or detecting use of, stigmatizing, and further restricting access to medication abortion care.
Whereas State and Federal antiabortion lawmakers continue to wage attacks to obstruct access to essential reproductive and time-sensitive health care;
Whereas in the years since the United States Supreme Court’s ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113 (1973)) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (505 U.S. 833 (1992)) in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (597 U.S. 215) decision on June 24, 2022, antiabortion advocates and lawmakers have tried to use baseless environmental claims and misinformation about mifepristone to justify restricting access to this essential medication nationwide, despite its longstanding safety record;
Whereas decades of science and overwhelming evidence show that mifepristone is safe and effective for virtually everyone who wants to end an early pregnancy;
Whereas attempts to restrict mifepristone lack an evidence-based consensus and are politically motivated by antiabortion lawmakers, judges, and groups;
Whereas Federal lawmakers seeking to restrict reproductive health care have pursued efforts to instruct the Environmental Protection Agency to develop methods to detect medication abortion, including mifepristone, in water systems, further politicizing essential reproductive health care;
Whereas over 60 bills have been introduced in 22 States to restrict access to medication abortion, including mifepristone, in 2026;
Whereas State lawmakers seeking to restrict access to medication abortion care have introduced legislation that, under the guise of protecting the environment, targets medication abortion directly, by imposing restrictions on its use, or indirectly, by requiring surveillance and testing for its presence in water systems based on misinformation;
Whereas safe, affordable, clean water is essential to environmental and reproductive justice;
Whereas most of the pollution in water systems in the United States (groundwater, surface water, wastewater, or drinking water) comes from poorly or untreated industrial agricultural products like pesticides, fertilizers, and animal waste runoff, or industry waste from mining, manufacturing, or energy production;
Whereas the proposed State legislation lacks any evidence and further mandates the diversion of essential environmental budgetary resources toward medication abortion water system testing and surveillance, despite the lack of scientific justification for such testing and, in some cases, the reported absence of the requisite State resources and the operational capacity required for the implementation;
Whereas the Food and Drug Administration has conducted scientific analyses and repeatedly found that mifepristone and its metabolites do not present any environmental concern or harm, including as recently as 2025;
Whereas there remains no scientific evidence demonstrating medication abortion, including mifepristone and its metabolites, presents any harm to the environment, wildlife, or water systems in the United States; and
Whereas Federal and State efforts to monitor water systems for mifepristone lack any scientific justification and highlights a harmful and underlying agenda unrelated to environmental protection or protection of public health: Now, therefore, be it
Sec.
That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that—
(1)
medications used in abortion care, including mifepristone, are safe and effective, approved by the Food and Drug Administration for over 25 years with decades of peer-reviewed science and evidence demonstrating its safety and efficacy;
(2)
medications used in abortion care, including mifepristone, should not be subject to political interference;
(3)
safeguarding water systems in the United States should rely on scientifically-based environmental strategies rather than the politicization of essential medications used in reproductive health care, including abortion; and
(4)
efforts to surveil the use of medications commonly used in abortion care under the false banner of environmental or public health protection represents a blatant weaponization of environmental laws and a direct attack on access to medication abortion.