42 U.S.C. § 274e

Prohibition of organ purchases

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Prohibition

It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any human organ for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation if the transfer affects interstate commerce. The preceding sentence does not apply with respect to human organ paired donation.

(b) Penalties

Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(c) DefinitionsFor purposes of subsection (a):(1) The term “human organ” means the human (including fetal) kidney, liver, heart, lung, pancreas, bone marrow, cornea, eye, bone, and skin or any subpart thereof and any other human organ (or any subpart thereof, including that derived from a fetus) specified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services by regulation.(2) The term “valuable consideration” does not include the reasonable payments associated with the removal, transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, and storage of a human organ or the expenses of travel, housing, and lost wages incurred by the donor of a human organ in connection with the donation of the organ.(3) The term “interstate commerce” has the meaning prescribed for it by section 321(b) of title 21.(4) The term “human organ paired donation” means the donation and receipt of human organs under the following circumstances:(A) An individual (referred to in this paragraph as the “first donor”) desires to make a living donation of a human organ specifically to a particular patient (referred to in this paragraph as the “first patient”), but such donor is biologically incompatible as a donor for such patient.(B) A second individual (referred to in this paragraph as the “second donor”) desires to make a living donation of a human organ specifically to a second particular patient (referred to in this paragraph as the “second patient”), but such donor is biologically incompatible as a donor for such patient.(C) Subject to subparagraph (D), the first donor is biologically compatible as a donor of a human organ for the second patient, and the second donor is biologically compatible as a donor of a human organ for the first patient.(D) If there is any additional donor-patient pair as described in subparagraph (A) or (B), each donor in the group of donor-patient pairs is biologically compatible as a donor of a human organ for a patient in such group.(E) All donors and patients in the group of donor-patient pairs (whether 2 pairs or more than 2 pairs) enter into a single agreement to donate and receive such human organs, respectively, according to such biological compatibility in the group.(F) Other than as described in subparagraph (E), no valuable consideration is knowingly acquired, received, or otherwise transferred with respect to the human organs referred to in such subparagraph.(Pub. L. 98–507, title III, § 301, Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2346; Pub. L. 100–607, title IV, § 407, Nov. 4, 1988, 102 Stat. 3116; Pub. L. 110–144, § 2, Dec. 21, 2007, 121 Stat. 1813.)Editorial NotesCodification

Section was enacted as part of the National Organ Transplant Act, and not as part of the Public Health Service Act which comprises this chapter.

Amendments

2007—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 110–144, § 2(1), inserted at end “The preceding sentence does not apply with respect to human organ paired donation.”

Subsec. (c)(4). Pub. L. 110–144, § 2(2), added par. (4).

1988—Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 100–607 amended par. (1) generally. Prior to amendment, par. (1) read as follows: “The term ‘human organ’ means the human kidney, liver, heart, lung, pancreas, bone marrow, cornea, eye, bone, and skin, and any other human organ specified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services by regulation.”

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesDetermination on the Definition of Human Organ

Pub. L. 114–104, § 4, Dec. 18, 2015, 129 Stat. 2218, provided that: “Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 2015], the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall issue determinations with respect to the inclusion of peripheral blood stem cells and umbilical cord blood in the definition of human organ.”

No Impact on Social Security Trust Fund

Pub. L. 110–144, § 4, Dec. 21, 2007, 121 Stat. 1814, provided that: “Nothing in this Act [see Short Title of 2007 Amendment note set out under section 201 of this title] (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed to alter or amend the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) (or any regulation promulgated under that Act).”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1990–2026 · leading case: Moore v. Regents of Univ. of California, 793 P.2d 479 (Cal. 1990).
Moore v. Regents of Univ. of California, 793 P.2d 479 (Cal. 1990). · cites it 2× “See also 42 U.S.C. § 274e.) To date, however, the Legislature has not adopted such a system for organs that are to be used for *160 research or commercial purposes, [5] and the majority opinion, despite some oblique suggestions to the contrary (see maj.”
Planned Parenthood of Kan. v. Andersen, 882 F.3d 1205 (10th Cir. 2018). “at 51 (citing 42 U.S.C. §§ 274e, 289g-2 ; Kan. Stat. Ann.”
Carey v. New England Organ Bank, 446 Mass. 270 (Mass. 2006). “Title 42 U.S.C. § 274e (a) and (c) (2) (2000) prohibits the knowing transfer of tissue or organs for valuable consideration, meaning compensation other than “reasonable payments associated with the removal, transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control,…”
United States v. Rainford, 110 F.4th 455 (2d Cir. 2024). “11 But remand is also necessary 10The concurrence’s reliance on 42 U.S.C. §274e is misplaced. That statute does not define or indeed even mention “victims,” and a search of all federal cases reported on Westlaw reveals no decisions holding that a willing seller of an organ…”
Perry v. Saint Francis Hosp. & Med. Ctr., Inc., 886 F. Supp. 1551 (D. Kan. 1995). · cites it 3× “The same is reflected in federal law at 42 U.S.C. § 274e, which prohibits the “transfer [of] any human organ 9 for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation” but permits reasonable payments for the costs associated with organ procurement and use.”
Doreen Flynn v. Eric H. Holder Jr., 684 F.3d 852 (9th Cir. 2011). · cites it 9× “42 U.S.C. § 274e. 2 . Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).”
Guo Qi Wang v. Holder, 583 F.3d 86 (2d Cir. 2009). “§ 274e(a) & (b) (providing that “[i]t shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any human organ for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation if the transfer affects interstate commerce” and that any person engaging in…”
Crocker v. Pleasant, 778 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 2001). “(2000) (prohibiting the purchase or sale of human organs and tissue); 42 U.S.C. § 274e (federal law preventing the sale of human organs).”
Stiver v. Parker, 975 F.2d 261 (6th Cir. 1992). “54 (providing that "a person shall not offer, give, or receive any money or other consideration or thing of value" except those fees or charges approved by the court in connection with the process of adoption).”
Doreen Flynn v. Eric H. Holder Jr. (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 9× “3 1 42 U.S.C. § 274e. 2 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).”
Legality of Alt. Organ Donation Practices Under 42 U.S.C. § 274e (OLC 2007). · cites it 9× “Legality of Alternative Organ Donation Practices Under 42 U.S.C. § 274e Two alternative kidney donation practices, in which a living donor who is incompatible with his intended recipient donates a kidney to a stranger in exchange for the intended recipient’s receiving a kidney…”
Larrie Jane Hoops v. Prime Healthcare Servs. - Mesquite LLC d/b/a Dallas Reg'l Med. Ctr. (N.D. Tex. 2026). · cites it 4× “§ 1983 and 42 U.S.C. § 274e, Doc. 37, and the motion sub judice followed.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 274e(a) — 10 cases
Guo Qi Wang v. Holder, 583 F.3d 86 (2d Cir. 2009). “§ 274e(a) & (b) (providing that “[i]t shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any human organ for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation if the transfer affects interstate commerce” and that any person engaging in…”
Perry v. Saint Francis Hosp. & Med. Ctr., Inc., 886 F. Supp. 1551 (D. Kan. 1995). “The same is reflected in federal law at 42 U.S.C. § 274e, which prohibits the “transfer [of] any human organ 9 for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation” but permits reasonable payments for the costs associated with organ procurement and use.”
Doreen Flynn v. Eric H. Holder Jr., 684 F.3d 852 (9th Cir. 2011). “42 U.S.C. § 274e. 2 . Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).”
Stiver v. Parker, 975 F.2d 261 (6th Cir. 1992). “54 (providing that "a person shall not offer, give, or receive any money or other consideration or thing of value" except those fees or charges approved by the court in connection with the process of adoption).”
Doreen Flynn v. Eric H. Holder Jr. (9th Cir. 2012). “3 1 42 U.S.C. § 274e. 2 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).”
— 42 U.S.C. § 274e(c)(1) — 3 cases
Perry v. Saint Francis Hosp. & Med. Ctr., Inc., 886 F. Supp. 1551 (D. Kan. 1995). “The same is reflected in federal law at 42 U.S.C. § 274e, which prohibits the “transfer [of] any human organ 9 for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation” but permits reasonable payments for the costs associated with organ procurement and use.”
Doreen Flynn v. Eric H. Holder Jr., 684 F.3d 852 (9th Cir. 2011). “42 U.S.C. § 274e. 2 . Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).”
Doreen Flynn v. Eric H. Holder Jr. (9th Cir. 2012). “3 1 42 U.S.C. § 274e. 2 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).”
— 42 U.S.C. § 274e(c)(2) — 1 case
Legality of Alt. Organ Donation Practices Under 42 U.S.C. § 274e (OLC 2007). “Legality of Alternative Organ Donation Practices Under 42 U.S.C. § 274e Two alternative kidney donation practices, in which a living donor who is incompatible with his intended recipient donates a kidney to a stranger in exchange for the intended recipient’s receiving a kidney…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 274e(c)(l) — 1 case
Doreen Flynn v. Eric H. Holder Jr., 684 F.3d 852 (9th Cir. 2011). “42 U.S.C. § 274e. 2 . Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.