¶ Overview
- Finstad vowed to “always protect the sanctity of life” after voting for the so-called “Born-Alive” bill. Then he doubled-down on that belief by cosponsoring the Life at Conception Act, a nationwide abortion ban. In 2025, Finstad cosponsored legislation to establish a federal consent requirement for women seeking to use abortion medication – the legislation was based on a premise that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said was “not based in science.”
¶ Finstad Was An Anti-Choice Extremist Who Supported A Nationwide Abortion Ban
¶ Finstad Supported THe overturning of Roe v. Wade
Finstad Supported The Supreme Court Overturning Roe V. Wade. According to the Globe, "QUESTION: Thoughts on the SCOTUS overturn of Roe v. Wade, and abortion access in Minnesota? […] FINSTAD: I am pro-life. I believe we must protect life, especially those most vulnerable. I believe it was good to overturn Roe v. Wade. Decisions like this should be made by our elected officials, especially at the state level. Unfortunately in Minnesota, we have now seen a court throw out modest laws that promote life." [The Globe, 8/1/22]
¶ Finstad co-sponsored a nationwide abortion ban
1/20/23: Finstad Cosponsored The Life At Conception Act. [H.R. 431, “Life at Conception Act,” Introduced 1/20/23, Cosponsored 4/27/23]
- The Life At Conception Act Would Have Banned Nearly All Abortions Nationwide. According to the Washington Post, "The congressional proposal, known as the Life at Conception Act, defines a ‘human being’ to ‘include each member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization or cloning, or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being.’ The bill would also provide equal protection under the 14th Amendment ‘for the right to life of each born and preborn human person.’ The measure has no provisions for processes like IVF, meaning access to the procedure would not be protected. It would ban nearly all abortions nationwide." [Washington Post, 2/25/24]
¶ finstad co-sponsored an anti-choice bill based on a premise that was “not based in science”
9/18/25: Finstad Cosponsored The “Second Chance At Life Act,” Which Established A Federal Informed Consent Requirement For Women Seeking To Take An Abortion Pill. According to a press release from Rep. August Pfluger, “As first reported in The Daily Signal, Congressman August Pfluger (TX-11) introduced legislation today to provide unborn children facing abortion a ‘second chance at life’ by establishing federal informed consent requirements for women seeking to take the abortion pill. The Second Chance at Life Act will ensure every single woman seeking this option knows it is possible to reverse the effects if they change their mind. […] The bill is co-sponsored in the House by Representatives Doug LaMalfa (CA-01), Ron Estes (KS-04), Barry Moore (AL-01), Marlin Stutzman (IN-03), Sheri Biggs (SC-03), Craig Goldman (TX-12), John Moolenaar (MI-04), John Rose (TN-06), Kat Cammack (FL-03), John McGuire (VA-05), Rep. Michael Guest (MS-03), Rep. Brad Finstad (MN-01)…” [Press Release – Rep. August Pfluger, 9/18/25]
- The “Second Chance At Life Act” Was Based On The Idea That Medication Abortion Pills Were Reversible. According to a press release from Rep. August Pfluger, "As first reported in The Daily Signal, Congressman August Pfluger (TX-11) introduced legislation today to provide unborn children facing abortion a ‘second chance at life’ by establishing federal informed consent requirements for women seeking to take the abortion pill. The Second Chance at Life Act will ensure every single woman seeking this option knows it is possible to reverse the effects if they change their mind. ‘Far too often, women are pressured into taking the abortion pill without being fully informed of all their options. Tragically, many later express deep regret as they come to terms with the loss of their unborn child. It is unacceptable that so many women are never told by their provider that the effects of the first pill can be reversible. That’s why I am introducing commonsense legislation to close this critical information gap. My Second Chance at Life Act establishes federal informed consent requirements for the abortion pill, ensuring women receive complete and accurate information about the pill and its potential reversal. This will empower women to make fully informed choices at every stage of the process, protecting their right to know the full details before taking any medication and safeguarding their unborn child’s chance at life,’ said Rep. Pfluger." [Press Release – Rep. August Pfluger, 9/18/25]
¶ American College Of Obstetricians And Gynecologists Said Claims About Abortion Reversal Treatments Were “Not Based In Science And Do Not Meet Clinical Standards”
The American College Of Obstetricians And Gynecologists Said Claims About Abortion Reversal Treatments Were “Not Based In Science And Do Not Meet Clinical Standards.” According to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, "Facts are important, especially when it comes to policies and discussions that impact patients. Claims regarding abortion ‘reversal’ treatment are not based on science and do not meet clinical standards. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) ranks its recommendations on the strength of the evidencei and does not support prescribing progesterone to stop a medication abortion. Despite this, in states across the country, politicians are advancing legislation to require physicians to recite a script that a medication abortion can be ‘reversed’ with doses of progesterone, to cause confusion and perpetuate stigma, and to steer women to this unproven medical approach. Unfounded legislative mandates like this one represent dangerous political interference and compromise patient care and safety." [American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Accessed 5/16/24]
¶ Finstad voted for the so-called “born alive” bill
2023: Finstad Voted For The So-Called “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act,” Which Would Allow Criminal Fines And Penalties For Clinic Practitioners And Hospital Employees For Failing To Meet Certain Requirements. In January 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Finstad 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]
- Finstad Touted His Vote For The So Called “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act” And Vowed To “Always Support The Sanctity of Life.” Rep. Brad Finstad tweeted, “Today, the House of Representatives voted to protect the right to life for babies who survive an abortion. All life is precious and I will always stand up to protect our most vulnerable.”
[Twitter, @RepFinstad, 1/11/23]
¶ The So-Called “Born Alive” Bills Attempted To Discourage Women From Seeking Abortions Or Doctors From Performing Them
KFF: “Claims Of Abortions Occurring ‘Moments Before Birth’ Or Even ‘After Birth’ Are False. These Scenarios Do Not Occur, Nor Are They Legal In The United States." According to KFF, "Claims of abortions occurring ‘moments before birth’ or even ‘after birth’ are false. These scenarios do not occur, nor are they legal in the United States." [KFF, 2/21/24]
CNN: “It Is Already Considered Homicide In The US To Intentionally Kill An Infant That Is Born Alive.” According to CNN, “Opponents have argued that such measures restrict abortion access by threatening health care providers. It is already considered homicide in the US to intentionally kill an infant that is born alive.” [CNN, 1/12/23]
Policy Organizations Supporting Abortion Rights Said The So-Called “Born Alive” Bill 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]