The House Judiciary Committee voted to advance House Bill 232 "ought to pass" as amended, adopting a replace‑all amendment that narrows the measure to conscience protections tied to abortion care and reduces damages language.

Representative Pedernal, the amendment sponsor, said the rewrite "removes sterilization and artificial contraception from the original bill" and "changes the definition of abortion to the same one currently in New Hampshire statute under the fetal life protection act," and argued the changes would make the bill more palatable and encourage physicians to practice in the state.

Opponents raised several objections during debate. Representative Rambo said the amended bill still "tramples on employers' rights to set schedules, to set shifts, to set assignments" and questioned an undefined exception for providers "providing abortion as a major part of its services." Representative Tur (speaker 2) urged the committee to consider the amendment's broad definition of who qualifies as a "health care provider," warning it could cover nonclinical staff and allow an employee to "conscientiously object in your mind and act according to that conscientious objection" without a clear process for employers to know when that occurs.

Several members also pressed the issue of damages. Representative Birch warned that mandatory minimums such as a $10,000 floor "makes no distinction between a de minimis, a very small mistake ... and some very deliberate, overt, major" misconduct and said the provision could substitute a jury's fact-finding role with a statutory floor on recovery.

The committee completed roll-call votes on the amendment and then on the main motion to advance the bill as amended. The transcript records the final outcome on the main bill as reported in the hearing: "10 yays, 7 nays." The committee asked the sponsor to write the majority report and designated a minority report.

What happens next: The bill, as amended, will be reported out of Judiciary to the House calendar with the committee's recommendation; the transcript shows the committee divided on whether the protections as drafted strike the right balance between clinicians' conscience rights and employers' and patients' access to care.