The ADOPT Act of 2025 adds a new federal offense to Title 18 that targets private domestic interstate adoption activity conducted by unlicensed intermediaries. It defines “adoption advertising” and “adoption intermediary services,” criminalizes those activities when tied to interstate commerce, and bans payments to placing parents over a $2,500 threshold before the placing parent consults a licensed agency or state-licensed attorney.
The bill creates exceptions for state-licensed agencies, attorneys, certain 501(c)(3) organizations acting under public-agency contract, and accredited intercountry adoption providers.
Why it matters: the bill federalizes conduct traditionally regulated by states and reaches online and cross-state activity through an interstate-commerce hook. Platforms, unlicensed facilitators, and anyone who advertises or arranges private placements across state lines will need to reassess practices to avoid felony exposure; licensed agencies and child-welfare advocates get a statutory tool aimed at curbing exploitative private placements.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill adds 18 U.S.C. §228A, defining and criminalizing paid adoption advertising, paid intermediary services, and unauthorized payments exceeding $2,500 to placing parents made before a required consultation. It lists narrow exceptions and ties federal jurisdiction to several interstate-commerce triggers.
Who It Affects
Unlicensed adoption facilitators and consultants, individuals placing paid ads or arranging placements across state lines, online platforms that host paid adoption ads, prospective adoptive and placing parents involved in interstate placements, and licensed agencies and attorneys whose roles and markets will shift under new federal rules.
Why It Matters
The ADOPT Act shifts some enforcement focus from state regulation to federal criminal law, particularly for cross-border and online placement activity. Compliance and moderation burdens will fall on platforms and paid facilitators, while licensed agencies may see reduced competition from unregulated providers.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The ADOPT Act creates a single federal statute aimed squarely at private domestic interstate adoptions arranged outside the state-licensed system. It starts by defining two core categories: adoption advertising (paid communications that solicit placing or adoptive parents or offer to pay living or medical expenses) and adoption intermediary services (paid activities that solicit placing or adoptive parents or act as a link between them).
The statute then makes it a federal crime to provide those intermediary services or to place adoption advertising when one of the statute’s interstate-commerce or territorial triggers applies.
A separate prohibition addresses payments: the bill bars providing any thing of value—money, property, or services including medical care—in connection with a birth and toward an adoption if the amount exceeds $2,500 and the payment occurs before the placing parent consults a state-licensed child-placing agency or a state-licensed attorney. The consultation requirement and the $2,500 floor are the bill’s compliance pivot points; payments made in cooperation with a licensed agency, a licensed attorney, or through public benefits are excluded.The interstate reach is broad and deliberately enumerated: federal jurisdiction attaches if a defendant or participant traveled in interstate or foreign commerce, used interstate channels (including wire or computer transmissions), made payments using interstate means, or if the conduct otherwise affected interstate commerce or occurred within U.S. territorial jurisdiction.
That language is designed to capture online ads and cross-state coordination without requiring physical movement in every case.Penalties are criminal: individuals face up to five years’ imprisonment, a $50,000 fine, or both per violation; organizations face $100,000 fines per violation. The bill also contains a rule of construction clarifying it does not alter the Indian Child Welfare Act, the Intercountry Adoption Act, or prevent states from imposing stricter rules.
The statute becomes effective 120 days after enactment.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The statute makes it a federal offense to provide paid adoption intermediary services or place paid adoption advertisements when the activity involves interstate commerce or other enumerated jurisdictional triggers.
A payment or benefit to a placing parent exceeding $2,500 is unlawful if made before the placing parent consults a state-licensed child-placing agency or an attorney licensed in the placing parent’s state, unless the payment is made by/with a licensed agency, licensed attorney, or via public benefits.
Exceptions cover public child-placing agencies, state-licensed private child-placing agencies, attorneys licensed in the relevant state, 501(c)(3) organizations acting under contract with a public agency, and accredited intercountry adoption service providers.
The interstate-commerce triggers include travel in interstate or foreign commerce, use of interstate channels or facilities (including wire or computer transmissions), payments made using interstate means, and conduct that otherwise affects interstate commerce.
Penalties are set by entity type: individuals face up to 5 years imprisonment and a $50,000 fine per violation; organizations face $100,000 fines per violation; the law takes effect 120 days after enactment.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Names the measure the Adoption Deserves Oversight, Protection, and Transparency Act of 2025 (ADOPT Act of 2025). This is purely stylistic but signals the bill’s framing around oversight and transparency rather than, for example, licensing or civil remedies.
Purpose clause
Sets out three stated goals: protect families from unlicensed intermediaries, ensure access to licensed providers, and prevent commodification of children in private domestic interstate adoption. The clause is a legislative guidepost that courts and agencies may use to interpret ambiguous provisions—particularly useful when assessing whether an activity ‘acts as a link’ in an adoption placement.
Definitions (18 U.S.C. §228A(a))
Establishes the statute’s key terms: adoption advertising (paid communications that solicit parents or offer to disburse value), adoption intermediary services (paid solicitation or linking activities), placing parent, public child-placing agency, and private licensed child-placing agency. The definitions are functional and broad—‘acting as a link’ and ‘soliciting’ are not narrowly circumscribed, which affects later enforcement and creates interpretive space for prosecutors and courts.
Substantive prohibitions: intermediary services, advertising, and payments
Subsection (b) criminalizes providing adoption intermediary services for compensation under the statute’s jurisdictional conditions, while (c) criminalizes placing adoption advertising. Subsection (d) specifically targets payments or things of value to placing parents exceeding $2,500 made before a required consultation with a licensed agency or attorney. Each prohibition lists narrow exceptions—state-licensed agencies, licensed attorneys, certain contracted 501(c)(3)s, and accredited intercountry providers—so lawful, regulated placements and recognized intercountry programs are carved out. The $2,500 threshold and consultation timing are compliance linchpins and will be the primary focus of defense and compliance strategies.
Jurisdictional hooks and penalties
Subsection (e) supplies multiple jurisdictional bases to bring conduct within federal criminal law: interstate travel, use of interstate means (including electronic communications), payments using interstate channels, transmissions via wire or computer, and any conduct that affects interstate commerce. Subsection (f) sets penalties: up to 5 years imprisonment and $50,000 fines for individuals per violation, and $100,000 fines per violation for organizations. The combination of broad jurisdictional language and significant penalties is designed to capture online and cross-state activity and to deter commercial intermediaries.
Rule of construction and effective date
Section 3(g) preserves the Indian Child Welfare Act and intercountry adoption law, and expressly allows states to adopt more stringent rules, signaling the federal law is not intended to displace state regulation of adoption generally. Section 4 makes the statute effective 120 days after enactment, giving a narrow window for platforms, agencies, and practitioners to adjust operations.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Criminal Justice across all five countries.
Explore Criminal Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Placing parents who receive care in private domestic interstate adoptions — the criminal prohibitions and $2,500 consultation rule aim to reduce exploitative brokers and payments that can pressure birth parents.
- Prospective adoptive parents seeking transparent, licensed placements — licensed agencies gain a statutory tool to reduce competition from unlicensed intermediaries and to reinforce regulated pathways.
- Child-welfare and advocacy organizations — the law provides federal backing to curb commercialized placements and strengthens legal deterrents against profiteering intermediaries.
- State-licensed child-placing agencies — by carving these agencies out as lawful, the bill may channel more placements through them, increasing referrals and contractual opportunities.
Who Bears the Cost
- Unlicensed facilitators and private adoption intermediaries — the statute criminalizes common business models for paid placement and advertising when interstate elements are present, exposing operators to felony risk and large fines.
- Online advertising platforms and classifieds sites — platforms that host paid adoption advertisements may need to change content moderation, ad policies, and transaction monitoring to avoid facilitating conduct that triggers federal jurisdiction.
- Small non-profits and support groups that assist with cross-state adoptions — even well-intentioned organizations could face compliance uncertainty unless operating under a public-agency contract or meeting other exceptions.
- Department of Justice and U.S. Attorneys' offices — enforcement will require investigative resources to trace payments, online communications, and cross-state coordination, potentially diverting resources from other priorities.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill confronts a real harm—commercial, unregulated intermediaries exploiting placing parents and treating children as commodities—but does so by creating a sweeping federal criminal regime that risks capturing benign informational activity, shifting enforcement burdens to federal prosecutors and platforms, and raising constitutional and federalism questions; the central dilemma is how to deter profiteering and protect vulnerable families without criminalizing legitimate support, speech, or cross-state coordination that serves the child’s best interest.
The bill squarely seeks to stop exploitative, commercialized private placements, but it leaves several implementation questions unresolved. The statutory phrases “acting as a link,” “solicits,” and the scope of “adoption advertising” are broad; prosecutors and courts will have to draw bright lines between unlawful brokering and lawful informational or supportive communications.
The $2,500 threshold creates a clear statutory trigger, but it also invites structuring of payments below the threshold or recharacterizing assistance as permitted public benefits or as in-cooperation payments with licensed entities.
The interstate-commerce enumeration is comprehensive to encompass online ads, wire communications, and cross-state travel, but that same breadth raises First Amendment and federalism concerns. Restricting paid communications or intermediary activity may be challenged where the line between protected speech (information, support groups) and unprotected transaction-facilitating conduct is thin.
Practical enforcement will require tracing payments and digital communications; platforms may adopt conservative moderation policies that remove borderline content, potentially cutting off legitimate peer-support or noncommercial matching. Finally, preserving ICWA and intercountry adoption statutes narrows some federal overreach, but the coexistence of federal criminal law with varied state licensing regimes will require coordination to avoid duplicative or conflicting enforcement.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.