Senate Passes Child Custody Protection Act

SENATE PASSES CHILD CUSTODY PROTECTION ACT

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made the following statement Tuesday in support of bipartisan The Child Custody Protection Act, S. 403, which passed by a vote of 65-34. Sen. Cornyn is a co-sponsor of the legislation.

Just last week the Senate unanimously approved landmark legislation that will help protect American children from violent sexual predators and other such criminals who would do them harm.

I proudly co-sponsored and worked to strengthen that bill—The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006—because the States needed, and asked for, the federal government's help to detect and deter violent sexual predators. The nationwide sex offender database and registration requirements are critical components that help prevent violent sexual predators from slipping underground and out of sight. Indeed, the Senate's passage of the Adam Walsh Act was a banner day for the safety of our children.

And today, the Senate will consider another important measure to protect the health and safety of American children—in particular, female minors. I am referring, of course, to S.403, the Child Custody Protection Act. I am proud to join Senator Ensign and a bipartisan group of over 40 senators that have co-sponsored this legislation.

This long-overdue proposal amends the federal criminal code to prohibit the transportation of a minor across state lines - without parental consent or notification - in order to obtain an abortion. To date, at least 37 states have laws on the books that require a minor girl who wishes to have an abortion to notify or obtain the consent of her parents. But let's be clear: this bill neither establishes a federal parental consent law, nor supersedes existing state laws. It merely reinforces the prerogatives of those states that have enacted parental notification and consent laws.

So the question before the Senate today is a straightforward one: Should Congress safeguard the legislative choice made by those States that have chosen to preserve the role of parents and guardians in the health and medical decisions of their children—particularly, their minor daughters? I believe that we must safeguard State prerogatives by protecting parental rights.

If a State has on its books a constitutionally sound parental notification or consent law, parents in that State should not have to fear that their minor daughters can legally be driven into a neighboring state to receive an abortion.

This is not a hypothetical concern. The New York Times reported that "Planned Parenthood in Philadelphia [Pennsylvania has a parental consent law] has a list of clinics, from New York to Baltimore, to which they will refer teenagers, according to the organization's executive director . . . ."

Even more disturbing, there is evidence that abortion clinics in states bordering Pennsylvania - states that don't have parental involvement laws -will advertise the lack of such requirements and use it as a selling point in their advertisements directed at minors in Pennsylvania.

I also worry that interstate transportation of minors to have abortions may be used to conceal criminal activity—like statutory rape. I, for one, believe that we ought to make it a federal crime for an adult male who impregnates a young girl to transport her out of her home state (without the knowledge and consent of her parents) in order to have an abortion. That's just common sense.

This legislation is not about abortion rights. It is about protecting the health and safety of children and preserving the role of parents in decisions concerning their child's medical care.

http://cornyn.senate.gov/index.asp?f=record&lid=1&yid=1&rid=237218&pg=1