This is not an official government website.
© 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Congressional Daily Record
This section captures a formal floor step rather than a policy debate. It mentions legislation such as Protecting Individuals with Down Syndrome Act, committees such as Committee on the Judiciary, members such as Steve Daines.
Official title: UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--S. 205
Issued
June 23, 2026
senate side of the record
People
3
Linked members mentioned in this section
Legislation
1
Bills and resolutions linked from this section
Committees
1
Committees connected to this section
Senate Holds
0
No hold activity linked here
Source Document
Connected Data
People mentioned
Bills and resolutions
Committees
Source Control
Reader mode is for comprehension. The linked government PDF is the official published source.
Download official Senate Record PDFReturn to issue contextMr. DAINES. Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Lankford for organizing this time today because tomorrow, June 24, marks a pivotal anniversary in our Nation's history. In fact, it was 4 years ago that the Supreme Court ruled that there is no Federal constitutional right to abortion and overturned Roe v. Wade in a landmark 6-3 decision that altered the landscape of the pro-life movement forever.
Court had decided otherwise. If the Court decided there was a national right to abortion, society's culture of death would be more prevalent; States would be prevented from enacting pro-life laws, and as a result, millions of unborn children would have been killed and countless more women would have experienced the trauma of losing their child.
I remember back in 2018 when I founded the U.S. Senate Pro-Life Caucus. I had no idea how important our work would become. I had no idea that we would get the opportunity to confirm pro-life Justices to the Supreme Court, including Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who became part of the majority on the Supreme Court to overturn Roe.
help promote a culture of life. And thanks to an incredible nationwide movement of grassroots activists, countless hearts and countless minds have been changed.
We cannot understate the importance of that day 4 years ago.
Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you
were born, I set you apart.
including the unborn, the disabled, and the aging. Unfortunately, these beliefs are under attack by pro-abortion advocates who use a disability diagnosis to justify abortion.
Let that sink in for a moment.
Why would we ever think that is OK? To use a prenatal diagnosis as a case for abortion is discrimination at best and eugenics at worst. It also spurs the belief that having Down syndrome makes your life less valuable or not worth living.
society and are loved by their families and friends. It is ironic that we celebrate Special Olympics here in the Washington. And yet we promote a prenatal diagnosis as a case to abort those athletes when they are in the womb.
Syndrome Act, which will ban doctors from performing abortions because the child received a prenatal Down syndrome diagnosis.
There is no clause that I can find that says “except for individuals with Down syndrome.” There is no clause that says “except for anyone with a disability.” It is very clear: Every person has a right to life. It is our duty to protect that life and be a voice for the voiceless.
other pro-life legislation that my colleagues are speaking on today and tomorrow. I am confident that one day, by the grace and the hand of God, abortion will be unthinkable, and every preborn child will be protected by the law.
decision, let's reflect with grateful hearts on the progress we have made, and let's look forward with hope to a future where every life, born and unborn, is valued.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 205 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Democratic whip.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, the provision that is being offered by the Senator from Montana, we should be very clear as to what it does: It makes it illegal for a medical professional to perform an abortion with the knowledge that a pregnant woman is seeking an abortion, in whole or in part—in whole or in part—on the basis of a test result indicating the fetus has Down syndrome, a prenatal diagnosis that the fetus has Down syndrome, or any other reason to believe the fetus may have Down syndrome.
Understand what the Senator from Montana is saying. We are holding the medical professional—the doctor, in most cases—responsible for understanding the reason why a person is seeking an abortion, in whole or in part, which suggests to me that it may not even be a major part but just a consideration, if at all.
the doctor who proceeds with the procedure which may be legal in the State it is being performed?
to help a woman cross State lines for the purpose of obtaining an abortion due to a Down syndrome concern. That also has a penalty of 5 years in prison.
It is serious.
politician, elected official, to call into question the reasons why someone may pursue a particular medical procedure?
compelling arguments to be made on both sides when it comes to this issue. If Republicans actually really wanted to help the Down syndrome community, they ought to focus on the issues that the community cares about.
How would I know those issues? I went to the National Down Syndrome Society and saw the list of their top legislative priorities.
No. 1, the top legislative priority for Down syndrome: Protecting Medicaid, No. 1, because it provides free health coverage for people with Down syndrome. And yet, we know what happened. This measure, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, was considered on the floor of the U.S. Senate, the future of Medicaid.
provision, voted to cut Medicaid by $1 trillion over the next several years.
doctors alike, and they said this is going to have a devastating impact on low-income individuals and individuals with disabilities. The National Down Syndrome Society knows that. That is why their highest priority—they would ask this Senate, this Congress, to function in this capacity, to protect Medicaid. But that is not the subject of the Senator's amendment before us today.
And the third priority is important as well: Increasing funding for medical research at the National Institutes of Health.
best left entirely to a woman, her family, her healthcare provider. The U.S. Senate should not be involved in that decision making. There is no Member of the Senate who I think is competent to judge someone else's circumstances and what is going through their mind when they make a critical medical decision like this one.
as the Senator from Montana did, that we soon—tomorrow—will reach the fourth anniversary of the Dobbs decision.
the problems that they ran into. Coincidentally, they were both mothers of children who were having subsequent babies, anxious to welcome those babies into the world, and then a sonogram disclosed terrible circumstances affecting that fetus.
that could not survive. It was anencephalic. She was required under Texas law because they don't want to even get close to the notion of ending a pregnancy prematurely—she waited, risking her own health until a deadline was reached set by the legislature in Texas.
she thought everything was just fine, and the sonogram disclosed that the baby could not survive. That is a fact. That is a reality.
decisions is really unfair. Each circumstance really begs the question as to whether we, as legislators, have a better insight into what is proper for a person in those circumstances or not.
I think that this provision is not necessary. I believe that the Down Syndrome Society has listed their priorities, and this measure from the Senator of Montana is not one of them.
Therefore, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
Mr. DURBIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Ms. ERNST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Iowa.