Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6945) to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act to clarify the authority of States to use funds for pregnancy centers, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6359) to require institutions of higher education to disseminate information on the rights of, and accommodations and resources for, pregnant students, and for other purposes; and providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 140) providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to Public Land Order No. 7917 for Withdrawal of Federal Lands; Cook, Lake, and Saint Louis Counties, MN.
- Introduced
- Adopted by House
Overview
This is a procedural bill that brings three separate measures to the House floor for consideration, including one (H.R. 6945) that would clarify states' authority to fund pregnancy centers and another (H.R. 6359) requiring colleges to provide information and resources for pregnant students.
Why it matters: These provisions could support pregnant women and students carrying their pregnancies to term, advancing the sanctity of life through both financial support for pregnancy resource centers and institutional accommodation for pregnant college students.
Topic: Sanctity of life · classifier confidence 72%
What this changes
Other
Law today: The bill does not spell out the prior law. HR1009 is a procedural rule that sets the terms for House consideration of three separate bills (H.R. 6945, H.R. 6359, and H.J. Res. 140); it does not itself amend substantive law but rather governs floor debate and voting on those three measures.
If passed: This bill does not make substantive legal changes itself. It is a procedural rule determining how the House will debate and vote on three separate bills: one to clarify state use of federal funds for pregnancy centers, one to require colleges to inform pregnant students of their rights and resources, and one to disapprove a federal land withdrawal in Minnesota. The actual changes would occur only if those three bills pass.
AI-generated from the bill text — verify against the official text.
Likely supporters & opponents
Likely support
- Pro-life advocacy organizations — Support floor consideration of bills that expand pregnancy-center funding and college support for pregnant students.
- Religious-liberty advocacy organizations — Support consideration of measures that enable states and institutions to direct resources toward pregnancy support without federal restrictions.
- Conservative House members — Support bringing these bills to a floor vote as part of the legislative agenda.
Likely opposition
- Pro-abortion-rights groups — Oppose floor consideration of bills that fund pregnancy centers and expand college support for pregnancy, which they view as alternatives to abortion access.
- Civil-liberties and women's-rights organizations — Oppose procedural rules that advance restrictions on abortion information or that redirect resources away from comprehensive reproductive options.
- Environmental or conservation groups — May oppose the land-withdrawal disapproval provision if they support federal protection of lands in Minnesota.
AI-inferred typical positions based on the bill’s substance — general stakeholder categories, not confirmed endorsements.
Should I support this?
Little direct impact
HR1009 is a procedural House rule, not a substantive law. Its passage or failure does not directly restrict or expand Christian families' freedoms, parental rights, or religious liberty—those outcomes depend on whether the three underlying bills pass. Christian parents should focus their attention on the merits of H.R. 6945, H.R. 6359, and H.J. Res. 140 themselves.
An AI assessment from a Christian-family perspective — religious freedom, parental rights, and freedom in education — not legal or voting advice.
Official summary
Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6945) to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act to clarify the authority of States to use funds for pregnancy centers, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6359) to require institutions of higher education to disseminate information on the rights of, and accommodations and resources for, pregnant students, and for other purposes; and providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 140) providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to Public Land Order No. 7917 for Withdrawal of Federal Lands; Cook, Lake, and Saint Louis Counties, MN.
Sponsors
- Austin Scott (R)
Status timeline
- 2026-01-21Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.H
- 2026-01-21On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 213 - 210 (Roll no. 35). (text: CR H1131-1132)H
- 2026-01-21On ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 212 - 210 (Roll no. 34).H
- 2026-01-21Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1138-1139)H
- 2026-01-21POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H. Res. 1009, the Chair put the question on ordering the previous question and by voice vote, announced the ayes had prevailed. Mr. McGovern demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.H
- 2026-01-21DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 1009.H
- 2026-01-21Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H1131-1138)H
- 2026-01-20Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 55.H
- 2026-01-20The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 6945, H.R. 6359, and H.J. Res. 140 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit on each measure.H
- 2026-01-20The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 119-459, by Mr. Scott, Austin.H
H = House · S = Senate · A = Assembly