Connecticut 2026 Session Status: Enacted Bipartisan · 21 D · 12 R cosponsors

SB 259 — AN ACT CONCERNING FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION.

Last action — SIGNED BY GOVERNOR

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed House
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 19, 2026. Enacted.

Signed by Governor Ned Lamont (Democratic) on May 07, 2026.

Odds of enactment

High chance

Based on the sponsor, cosponsors, and committee posture, this bill has a high chance of becoming law.

Upgrade to see the exact probability and what's driving it.

A statistical estimate from our own model of past outcomes — an insight, not a guarantee. Policymaking is volatile.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 78% · moderate confidence

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 35 sponsors

    35 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Bipartisan support

    Sponsored across 2 parties (21 D · 12 R) — cross-party backing.

Based on stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes, and cross-state momentum — a description of the observable signals, not a prediction.

Bill Text

What changed in the latest version

100 added · 248 removed

Plain-language change summary

The revised version of Bill SB 259 now clearly defines female genital mutilation and sets strict guidelines about when a surgical procedure involving female genitalia is permitted. It stipulates that such procedures must be necessary for medical reasons and performed by licensed medical professionals, emphasizing that cultural or ritual beliefs cannot justify them. This change is significant as it strengthens protections for minors and aims to prevent harmful practices while allowing for legitimate medical interventions.

→
Previous
Latest
Senate General Assembly File No.
Substitute Senate Bill No.
586 February Session, 2026 Substitute Senate Bill No.
259 Public Act No.
259 Senate, April 13, 2026 The Committee on Judiciary reportedthrough SEN.
26-5 AN ACT CONCERNING FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION.
WINFIELD of the 10th Dist., Chairperson of the Committee on the part of the Senate, that the substitute bill ought to pass.
AN ACT CONCERNING FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION.
(b) A surgical operation is not a violation of subsection (a) of this section if such operation is (1) (A) necessary to the health of the person on whom it is performed, (B) for a medical purpose, and (C) performed by a physician licensed pursuant to chapter 370 of the general statutes or other licensed health care professionalacting withinthescopeoftheir profession, or (2) performed on a person in labor or who has just given birth and for a medical purpose related to such labor or birth by (A) a physician licensed pursuant to chapter 370 of the general statutes, (B) a nurse-midwife licensed pursuant to chapter 377 of the general statutes, (C) a person in training to become such a physician or nurse-midwife, sSB259 / File No.
(b) A surgical operation is not a violation of subsection (a) of this section if such operation is (1) (A) necessary to the health of the person on whom it is performed, (B) for a medical purpose, and (C) performed by a physician licensed pursuant to chapter 370 of the general statutes or other licensed health care professionalacting withinthescopeoftheir profession, or (2) performed on a person in labor or who has just given birth and for a medical purpose related to such labor or birth by (A) a physician licensed pursuant to chapter 370 of the general statutes, (B) a nurse-midwife licensed pursuant to chapter 377 of the general statutes, (C) a person in training to become such a physician or nurse-midwife, or (D) other licensed health care professional acting within the scope of their profession.
586 1 sSB259 File No.
For purposes of this subsection, a surgical operation is not (i) necessary to the health of the person on whom it is performed, or (ii) for a medical purpose, if the basis for such necessity or purpose is Substitute Senate Bill No.
586 or (D) other licensed health care professional acting within the scope of their profession.
259 based on the belief of the person performing the operation or any other person that such operation is required as a matter of custom or ritual.
For purposes of this subsection, a surgical operation is not (i) necessary to the health of the person on whom it is performed, or (ii) for a medical purpose, if the basis for such necessity or purpose is based on the belief of the person performing the operation or any other person that such operation is required as a matter of custom or ritual.
If the court orders the testimony of a child to be taken under this subsection, the child shall not sSB259 / File No.
If the court orders the testimony of a child to be taken under this subsection, the child shall not be required to testify in court at the proceeding for which the testimony was taken.
586 2 sSB259 File No.
Public Act No.
586 be required to testify in court at the proceeding for which the testimony was taken.
26-5 2 of 4 Substitute Senate Bill No.
(b) In any criminal prosecution of an offense involving female genital mutilation, assault, sexual assault or abuse of a child twelve years of age or younger, the court may, upon motion of the attorney for any party, order that the following procedures be used when the testimony of the child is taken:
259 (b) In any criminal prosecution of an offense involving female genital mutilation, assault, sexual assault or abuse of a child twelve years of age or younger, the court may, upon motion of the attorney for any party, order that the following procedures be used when the testimony of the child is taken:
(NEW) (Effective October 1, 2026) In all actions pursuant to sSB259 / File No.
(NEW) (Effective October 1, 2026) In all actions pursuant to Public Act No.
586 3 sSB259 File No.
26-5 3 of 4 Substitute Senate Bill No.
586 section 4 of this act, the immunity between parent and child in such action brought by a child against such child's parent or on behalf of a child against such child's parent is abrogated.
259 section 4 of this act, the immunity between parent and child in such action brought by a child against such child's parent or on behalf of a child against such child's parent is abrogated.
This act shall take effect as follows and shall amend the following sections:
Governor's Action:
Section 1 October 1, 2026 New section Sec.
Approved May 7, 2026 Public Act No.
2 October 1, 2026 54-86g Sec.
26-5 4 of 4
3 October 1, 2026 54-86h Sec.
4 October 1, 2026 New section Sec.
5 October 1, 2026 New section Sec.
6 October 1, 2026, and New section applicable to all cases filed on or after said date JUD Joint Favorable Subst.
sSB259 / File No.
586 4 sSB259 File No.
586 The following Fiscal Impact Statement and Bill Analysis are prepared for the benefit of the members of the General Assembly, solely for purposes of information, summarization and explanation and do not represent the intent of the General Assembly or either chamber thereof for any purpose.
In general, fiscal impacts are based upon a variety of informational sources, including the analyst’s professional knowledge.
Whenever applicable, agency data is consulted as part of the analysis, however final products do not necessarily reflect an assessment from any specific department.
OFA Fiscal Note State Impact:
Agency Affected Fund-Effect FY 27 $ FY 28 $ Correction, Dept.;
Judicial Dept.
GF - Potential Minimal Minimal (Probation) Cost Resources of the General Fund GF - Potential Minimal Minimal Revenue Gain Note:
GF=General Fund Municipal Impact:
None Explanation The bill creates a new class D felony for performing female genital mutilation on a minor, resulting in a potential cost to the Department of Correction and the Judicial Department for incarceration or probation and a potential revenue gain to the General Fund from fines.
On average, the marginal cost to the state for incarcerating an offender for the year is $3,300 while the average marginal cost for supervision in the community is less than $600 each year for adults and $450 each year for juveniles.
The Out Years 1Inmate marginal cost is based on increased consumables (e.g., food, clothing, water, sewage, living supplies, etc.) This does not include a change in staffing costs or utility expenses because these expenses would only be realized if a unit or facility opened.
2Probation marginal cost is based on services provided by private providers and only includes costs that increase with each additional participant.
This does not include a cost for additional supervision by a probation officer unless a new offense is anticipated to result in enough additional offenders to require additional probation officers.
sSB259 / File No.
586 5 sSB259 File No.
Show all 88 changed rows (48 more)
Previous
Latest
586 The annualized ongoing fiscal impact identified above would continue into the future subject to the number of offenses and fines collected.
sSB259 / File No.
586 6 sSB259 File No.
586 OLR Bill Analysis sSB 259 AN ACT CONCERNING FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION.
SUMMARY This bill generally makes it a class D felony, punishable by up to five years in prison, up to a $5,000 fine, or both, to perform female genital mutilation (FGM) on a minor.
The bill establishes that a child FGM victim is qualified to testify without prior qualification, and leaves it up to the jury (or the judge in nonjury trials) to determine the weight and credibility to give to the child’s testimony.
It also authorizes a court to use special procedures when a child age 12 or younger is testifying in these cases, including allowing the child to be videotaped rather than having to testify in open court.
The bill also allows a victim to sue the person who performed FGM on her (including the victim’s parent, when applicable) to recover compensatory or punitive damages or other relief the court considers appropriate.
It allows the victim to bring the lawsuit, in the judicial district where she lives, at any time until her 48th birthday.
Existing law generally has a three-year statute of limitations for civil torts.
Under the bill, a person performs FGM when he or she knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora, labia minora, or clitoris of a person under age 18.
But an operation is not FGM if it is:
1.
necessary for the person’s health, for a medical purpose, and performed by a licensed physician or another licensed health professional acting within their scope of practice;
or sSB259 / File No.
586 7 sSB259 File No.
586 2.
performed on someone in labor or immediately after childbirth, is for a related medical purpose, and performed by a licensed physician or nurse-midwife, person in training to be a physician or nurse-midwife, or other licensed health professional acting within their scope of practice.
An operation is not considered necessary for the person’s health or for a medicalpurpose if it isbasedonabelief ofthehealthcare provider, or anyone else, that custom or ritual requires it.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
October 1, 2026, and the provision on the civil statute of limitations applies to cases filed on or after that date.
§ 2 — PROCEDURES TO TAKE TESTIMONY OF CHILD VICTIM For criminal FGM cases involving children age 12 or younger, the bill applies special procedures that under existing law already apply to cases involving assault, sexual assault, or abuse of children of that same age.
Videotaped Testimony.
Underthese procedures, thecourt,uponthe motion of either party’s attorney, may order that the child’s testimony be taken (in the judge’s presence) in a room other than the courtroom.
The testimony canbeshownsimultaneously inthecourtroomviaclosed circuit television or videotaped for later showing before the court.
The judge and the attorneys may question the child.
Generally, the only people allowed in the room with the child (other than the camera operator) are the judge, the defendant, both sides’ attorneys, and any person who would contribute to the child’s welfare and well-being.
But the court can exclude the defendant (or order the defendant to be screened from the child’s sight and hearing) if the state proves, by clear and convincing evidence, that his or her presence would intimidate or inhibit the child so much that there is a compelling need to exclude the defendant in order to ensure that the child’s testimony is reliable.
If the court excludes the defendant, it must ensure that the child cannot see or hear the defendant, but that the defendant is able to see sSB259 / File No.
586 8 sSB259 File No.
586 and hear the child testify.
The defendant also must be able to consult privately and at all times with his or her attorney during the testimony.
Other Procedures.
Under these procedures, the court may also take any of the following steps when the child is testifying, upon the motion of either party’s attorney:
1.
prohibit anyone from entering or leaving the courtroom during that time;
2.
have an adult the child knows and is comfortable with sit close to her while she testifies, as long as that person does not screen the child from the sight of the defendant or trier of fact (judge or jury);
3.
allow the child to use anatomically correct dolls;
and 4.
require the attorneys to ask their questions and pose objections while seated and to raise objections and ask questions in a non- intimidating manner.
BACKGROUND Related Federal Law Federal law makes it a crime to knowingly perform FGM on a minor when one of certain conditions were met to establish a link to interstate or foreign commerce (for example, the victim or defendant crossed state or U.S.
borders for the procedure, or payment for the procedure was sent through interstate or foreign commerce).
The federal law contains a similar definition for FGM as this bill and allows similar exceptions (18 U.S.C.
§ 116).
COMMITTEE ACTION Judiciary Committee Joint Favorable Substitute Yea 37 Nay 0 (03/24/2026) sSB259 / File No.
586 9
⬇ Download PDF
View plain text versions (3)

Action History

  1. SIGNED BY GOVERNOR

  2. TRANSMITTED BY SECRETARY OF THE STATE TO GOVERNOR

  3. TRANSMITTED TO SECRETARY OF THE STATE

  4. PUBLIC ACT 26-5

  5. IN CONCURRENCE

  6. HOUSE PASSED

  7. HOUSE CALENDAR NUMBER 482

  8. FAV. RPT., TABLED FOR HOUSE CALENDAR

  9. SENATE PASSED

  10. FILE NO. 586

  11. SENATE CALENDAR NUMBER 379

  12. FAV. RPT., TAB. FOR CAL., SEN.

  13. RPTD. OUT OF LCO

  14. REFERRED TO Office of Legislative Research AND Office of Fiscal Analysis 04/13/26

  15. FILED WITH LCO

  16. Joint Favorable Substitute

  17. PUBLIC HEARING 0302

  18. REF. TO JOINT COMM. ON Judiciary

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

35 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 152 not signed on

Sponsors (35)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (152)

152 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 152 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Subjects

civil-rights healthcare
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

Who sponsors SB 259?
SB 259 is sponsored by Morrin Bello, Sanchez, J., Steven J. Stafstrom (Democratic), Donna Veach (Republican), Paul Cicarella (Republican), Tina Courpas (Republican), Tammy Nuccio (Republican), John A. Kissel (Republican), Hector Arzeno (Democratic), Larry Pemberton (Democratic), Craig C. Fishbein (Republican), Kenneth Gucker (Democratic), Aundre Bumgardner (Democratic), Kathy Kennedy (Republican), Patricia Billie Miller (Democratic), Tony Hwang (Republican), Jennifer Leeper (Democratic), Aimee Berger-Girvalo (Democratic), Laurie Sweet (Democratic), Martha Marx (Democratic), Devin R. Carney (Republican), Nicole Klarides-Ditria (Republican), Julie Kushner (Democratic), Sarah Keitt (Democratic), Michael D. Quinn (Democratic), Steven Winter (Democratic), Mary M. Mushinsky (Democratic), Dominique Johnson (Democratic), Kate Farrar (Democratic), Gary A. Turco (Democratic), Josh Elliott (Democratic), Heather S. Somers (Republican), Nicholas Menapace (Democratic), Eleni Kavros DeGraw (Democratic), and Kurt Vail (Republican).
What is the current status of SB 259?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 19, 2026. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 259?
Track SB 259 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 259

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 259

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →