¶ Overview
- In 2022, Steil celebrated the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe V. Wade, claiming it was a “great victory for life.” Steil is “proudly pro-life,” or so his website claimed until he deleted the page with his abortion position.
- In Congress, Steil was a staunch anti-abortion advocate. He voted against the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would have codified the right to receive abortion services. He also supported the so-called Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which could have resulted in criminal penalties for medical providers.
¶ In Congress, Steil Opposed Reproductive Freedom For Wisconsinites
¶ steil celebrated the court decision to overturn roe v. wade
Steil Claimed The Overturning Of Roe V. Wade Was A “Great Victory For Life.”
[Twitter, @RepBryanSteil, 6/24/22]
- HEADLINE: “Supreme Court Overturns Roe V. Wade, Ending Right To Abortion Upheld For Decades” [National Public Radio, 6/24/22]
- HEADLINE: “13 States Have Passed So-Called ‘Trigger Laws,’ Bans Designed To Go Into Effect If Roe V. Wade Is Overturned” [CNN, 5/3/22]
2021: Steil Signed Onto An Amicus Brief Urging The Supreme Court To Overturn The Right To Abortion. According to Salon, "Steil’s track record in Congress, however, makes his stance on abortion clear. In 2021, he signed onto an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to overturn the federal right to abortion and lauded the subsequent decision." [Salon, 8/25/25; Supreme Court of the United States, Brief Amici Curiae Of 228 Members, 7/29/21]
¶ 2025: steil wiped his pro-life positions from his website
June 2025: Steil Wiped Section Of His Issues Page That Outlined His Pro-Life Opinions. According to Salon, "The campaign website for Rep. Bryan Steil, who has served in Wisconsin’s 1st Congressional District since 2018, underwent an overhaul sometime between May 15 and June 27, snapshots of the website show. It featured new branding and an updated issues page detailing his platform on three major issues — strengthening the economy, ‘securing our communities’ and ‘protecting our seniors’ — while including a few paragraphs at the end of the page noting his support for veterans and, briefly, improved access to education, lowering prices and life. On May 15, however, that issues page included a larger description of Steil’s pro-life perspective, explaining that he is ‘proudly pro-life,’ lauding the Dobbs decision as a ‘victory for life,’ listing the anti-abortion legislation and initiatives — like the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act and striking taxpayer funding for abortion care — he backed and stating his support for access to IVF, according to an archive of the webpage." [Salon, 8/25/25]
Steil’s Website Had Previously Claimed He Was “Proudly Pro-Life” And Wanted To “Protect The Sanctity Of Life.” According to Salon, "‘I am proudly pro-life,’ the three-paragraph section began. ‘We must work to cherish and protect the sanctity of life at its most vulnerable stages.’ His campaign website now only mentions his support for IVF while nodding to his pro-life views in a single line at the bottom of the issues page. ‘He supports access to IVF and is a strong supporter of life,’ the site says." [Salon, 8/25/25]
¶ steil voted against the right to an abortion and to punish physicians
Steil Supported A Bill That Would Have Criminalized Physicians “Who Provide Abortions After Detecting A Heartbeat Or In Rare Cases Where A Child Was Born Alive After An Attempted Abortion.” According to Salon, "The congressman has twice voted against a bill that would have barred government restrictions on access to abortion care and cosponsored bills that would have criminalized physicians who provide abortions after detecting a heartbeat or in rare cases where a child was born alive after an attempted abortion." [Salon, 8/25/25]
¶ Steil Opposed The Women’s Health Protection Act, Which Would Have Codified The Right To Receive Abortion Services
7/15/22: Steil Voted Against The Women’s Health Protection Act, Which Would Have Codified The Right To Receive Abortion Services And The Right For Medical Providers To Provide Abortion Services. In July 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Steil voted against the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022, which would “statutorily establish that health care providers have a right to provide and patients have a right to receive abortion services, and it would prohibit certain restrictions related to abortion services. The bill would specify that rights established by the bill may not be restricted by certain requirements or limitations related to abortion services, including prohibitions on abortion prior to fetal viability, or after fetal viability if a provider determines that continuation of a pregnancy would pose a risk to a patient's life or health; requirements that patients disclose reasons for seeking an abortion or make medically unnecessary in-person appointments; requirements that providers provide medically inaccurate information or perform specific medical tests or procedures in connection with the provision of abortion services; limitations on providers' ability to prescribe drugs based on good-faith medical judgment, provide services via telemedicine or provide immediate services when a delay would pose a risk to a patient's health; and requirements for facilities and personnel that would not apply to facilities providing medically comparable procedures. It would also prohibit requirements or limitations that are similar to those established by the bill or that impede access to abortion services and expressly or implicitly single out abortion services, providers or facilities.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote 219-210, thus the bill was sent to the Senate. The Senate did not take substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 360, 7/15/22; Congressional Quarterly, 7/15/22; Congressional Actions, H.R. 8296]
- The Bill Was Another Attempt To Codify Roe V. Wade After The Senate Failed To Advance The First Version Of The Bill In May 2022. According to The Washington Post, “One bill, the Women’s Health Protection Act, would enshrine the protections of Roe v. Wade into law. The House already passed the bill last year, but it did not advance in a Senate vote in May. The House passed the bill, 219-210, prompting applause from Democrats in the chamber. All Republicans and Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Tex.) voted against the measure.” [The Washington Post, 7/15/22]
- Republicans Falsely Mislabeled The Bill As The “Abortions On Demand Until Birth Act.” According to The Washington Post, “As further proof of their opposition to the measure, Republicans falsely renamed the legislation in their whip notice as the ‘Abortions on Demand until Birth Act’ — which is a misrepresentation of the bill — and repeated that claim on the House floor.” [The Washington Post, 7/15/22]
- The Bill Would Establish The Right For Medical Providers To Provide Abortion Services And Their Patients The Right To Receive Them And Invalidate State Restrictions That Were Implemented After The Reversal Of Roe V. Wade. According to The New York Times, “A second measure, a version of which passed the House last year, would explicitly give health care providers the right to provide abortion services and their patients the right to obtain them, invalidating a variety of state restrictions that were enacted in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision reversing Roe v. Wade and ending the constitutional right to abortion. That second measure, the Women’s Health Protection Act, passed 219 to 210, also mainly along party lines, with one Democrat, Representative Henry Cuellar of Texas, voting with Republicans.” [New York Times, 7/15/22]
- The Bill Would Allow Abortions After Viability Only In Health- Or Life-Threatening Circumstances. According to The New York Times, “In reality, the Democratic bill allows abortions after viability only in circumstances when a doctor determines that the continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the patient’s life or health.” [New York Times, 7/15/22]
¶ Steil was an advocate for the “born-alive abortion survivors protection act,” WHICH COULD DISCOURAGE WOMEN FROM SEEKING ABORTION CARE AND DISSUADE DOCTORS FROM PERFORMING THEM
4/14/21: Steil Signed A Discharge Petition To Bring The “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act” To A Vote On The House Floor.
[Twitter, @RepBryanSteil, 4/14/21]
Steil Advocated For The Passage Of The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. According to a post on Rep. Bryan Steil’s Twitter, "I believe in the sanctity of life. I’m a cosponsor of the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act to ensure every newborn child has the right to life."
[Twitter, @RepBryanSteil, 9/15/20]
Steil Said “We Must Stand For Life,” After Senate Democrats Blocked The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. According to a post on Rep. Bryan Steil’s Twitter, "Senate Democrats just blocked the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act from passing the Senate. House Democrats have blocked the same bill from being voted on over 80 times. Babies born alive must have the same rights as a newborn child. We must stand for life."
[Twitter, @RepBryanSteil, 2/25/20]
2023: Steil Voted For The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, Which Would Mandate Health Care Workers To Provide Proper Medical Care To An Infant Born After A Failed Abortion. In January 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Steil voted for Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which would “require health care practitioners to provide the same care to a child that is ‘born alive’ after an abortion or attempted abortion as they would for a child born at the same gestational age and to ensure the child is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital; require hospital and clinic practitioners and employees to report any knowledge of failures to provide such care; and impose criminal fines and penalties for failures to meet these requirements. It would state that a child born alive under these conditions is a legal person under U.S. law, entitled to the protections of U.S. law, and it would specifically make any act that kills or attempts to kill such a child punishable as murder or attempted murder. The bill would also prohibit the prosecution of the mother of a child born alive after an abortion or attempted abortion and permit such mothers to seek relief through civil action against any person who violates the bill’s requirements, including monetary and punitive damages.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-210, thus the bill was sent to the Senate. [House Vote 29, 1/11/23; Congressional Quarterly, 1/11/23; Congressional Actions, H.R. 26]
- The “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act” Would Impose A Fine And Up To 5 Years In Jail If Medical Providers Failed To Comply. According to Michigan Independent, “H.R. 21 would require that health care providers give the same level of medical care to an infant ‘born alive’ during an attempted abortion as any other newborn and that the infant be ‘immediately transported and admitted to a hospital.’ The legislation imposes a fine and up to five years behind bars or both for providers if they fail to comply.” [Michigan Independent, 1/28/25]
- Policy Organizations Supporting Abortion Rights Argued The Measure Was An Effort To Discourage Women From Seeking Abortions And Doctors From Performing Them. According to the New York Times, "Republicans have routinely brought up what they call the ‘Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act’ when they are in control of Congress, presenting it as something that should not be debatable. […] The surgical method typically used to perform an abortion after the first trimester, known as dilation and evacuation, makes the odds of a live birth negligible. A vast majority of abortions in the United States occur in the first trimester, before the point of fetal viability, which is currently at about 23 weeks. Policy organizations supporting abortion rights said the measure was an effort to discourage women from seeking abortions and doctors from performing them." [New York Times, 1/22/25]
¶ steil accepted endorsements from advocacy groups OPPOSED TO ABORTION RIGHTS
2020: Steil Touted His Endorsement From Wisconsin Right To Life.
[Twitter, @BryanSteil, 9/17/20]
2020: Steil Touted His ‘A’ Rating From Susan B. Anthony List.
[Twitter, @RepBryanSteil, 1/23/20]
- Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America Is The “Political Arm Of The Pro-Life Movement.” According to Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, "Marjorie Dannenfelser and a group of pro-life women founded Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America in 1992 as the political arm of the pro-life movement. Named after the influential suffragette who also fiercely opposed abortion, SBA Pro-Life America seeks to embody the courageous spirit of our namesake through our leadership of the pro-life movement. Since our founding, SBA Pro-Life America has grown into a nationwide network of more than 1,000,000 Americans committed to serving women and saving babies. Our full family of organizations is united in the singular mission of saving innocent and vulnerable human life. We work cooperatively to meet the pro-life movement’s need to maximize election outcomes, and to enhance policy research and education for policymakers and the public." [Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, About, Viewed 1/7/26]