H.R.3084 - Stealthing Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.3084, the Stealthing Act of 2025, aims to create a federal civil action for non-consensual sexual protection barrier removal, often referred to as "stealthing." The bill allows individuals to sue perpetrators for damages resulting from this act. It defines "non-consensual sexual protection barrier removal" and "sexual protection barrier" to provide clarity for legal proceedings.
The bill cites findings that stealthing is a form of sexual violence with potential physical and emotional consequences. It also references studies indicating the prevalence of stealthing.
The Act establishes federal jurisdiction by linking the act to interstate commerce, thereby enabling federal courts to hear these cases. This is done by specifying circumstances under which the act falls under federal purview.
Expected Effects
If enacted, this bill would provide a legal avenue for victims of stealthing to seek justice and compensation through civil lawsuits at the federal level. It could also raise awareness about stealthing and deter such behavior.
The bill's reliance on interstate commerce could lead to legal challenges regarding the scope of federal power. The definition of 'sexual protection barrier' could be subject to interpretation in future cases.
Passage of this bill could lead to increased litigation related to sexual encounters, potentially impacting the justice system.
Potential Benefits
- Provides a legal recourse for victims of stealthing, allowing them to seek compensation and justice.
- Acknowledges and addresses stealthing as a form of sexual violence.
- May deter individuals from engaging in stealthing due to the potential for civil lawsuits.
- Could lead to increased awareness and education about consent and sexual health.
- Establishes a federal standard, ensuring consistency across states.
Potential Disadvantages
- Could lead to frivolous lawsuits or false accusations.
- May strain the federal court system with an increase in civil cases related to sexual encounters.
- The definition of "consent" and "non-consensual removal" may be subject to interpretation and legal challenges.
- Potential for the law to be used as a tool for revenge or manipulation.
- Reliance on interstate commerce to establish federal jurisdiction could be viewed as an overreach of federal power.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutional alignment hinges on the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3), which grants Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. The bill attempts to establish federal jurisdiction over stealthing by linking it to interstate commerce through various means, such as travel, communication, or payment involving interstate channels.
However, the extent to which stealthing directly affects interstate commerce could be debated, potentially leading to constitutional challenges. The Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 18) could also be invoked to argue that this law is necessary to enforce regulations related to interstate commerce.
While the bill does not appear to directly infringe upon individual rights protected by the Bill of Rights, its application could raise due process concerns if the definitions of "consent" and "non-consensual removal" are not clearly defined and consistently applied.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).