Immigration Desk
Immigration Bills
21 bills in the Immigration desk, ordered for current relevance and readability.
ImmigrationHR-176-119Latest action: Dec 2, 20254 readersPassed Chamber
No Immigration Benefits for Hamas Terrorists Act of 2025
Sponsored by Tom McClintock
Under current immigration law, the Department of Homeland Security can deny entry to foreign nationals based on security grounds, including support for designated terrorist organizations. The Immigration and Nationality Act lists specific groups—including the Palestine Liberation Organization—whose members or representatives are inadmissible. However, existing law does not explicitly address individuals who participated in or supported the October 7, 2023 attacks on Israel, leaving ambiguity about whether such participation alone triggers automatic inadmissibility or bars relief from removal. This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to establish explicit grounds for denying entry and immigration benefits to individuals connected to the October 7, 2023 attacks. The Department of Homeland Security must now treat as inadmissible any alien who carried out, participated in, planned, financed, provided material support to, or otherwise facilitated those attacks. The bill also renders such individuals ineligible for any relief under immigration law, including asylum, withholding of removal, and other protective statuses. Additionally, the bill adds Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad to the list of organizations whose members are presumptively inadmissible. Implementation begins immediately upon enactment. The Department of Homeland Security must determine which individuals meet the criteria through existing vetting and investigative processes, with no new funding mechanism specified. Beginning one year after enactment, DHS must report annually to Congress on the number of aliens found inadmissible under this provision and those ordered removed. The change affects immigration proceedings already underway and future applications, potentially blocking asylum claims and other relief for individuals with alleged connections to the attacks, while creating a new category of deportable aliens.
Immigration
Latest updateDec 1, 2025
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H4926)
Immigration
ImmigrationHR-29-119Latest action: Feb 10, 20250 readersPassed Chamber
Laken Riley Act
Sponsored by Mike Collins
Under current immigration law, the Department of Homeland Security has discretion to detain or release certain noncitizens pending removal proceedings. Section 236(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act requires mandatory detention for noncitizens convicted of specific crimes, including crimes of violence and drug trafficking. However, theft-related offenses—burglary, larceny, and shoplifting—are not currently included in the mandatory detention categories, meaning DHS officials can exercise discretion about whether to hold such individuals in custody. The Laken Riley Act expands mandatory detention requirements by requiring the Department of Homeland Security to take into custody and issue detainers for noncitizens who are charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or admit to committing theft, burglary, larceny, or shoplifting offenses—provided they are also inadmissible under specific grounds related to criminal history or security concerns. The bill defines these theft-related terms according to the laws of the jurisdiction where the acts occurred. Additionally, the bill grants state attorneys general and other authorized state officers standing to sue the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, and the Attorney General in federal court if they believe these detention and removal requirements are violated, with courts required to expedite such cases. States can bring such actions if they or their residents experience harm, including financial harm exceeding $100. Implementation begins immediately upon enactment. DHS must issue detainers for qualifying noncitizens and take custody if they are not otherwise detained by federal, state, or local authorities. The mandatory detention requirement removes discretion from immigration officials in these cases. State enforcement provisions allow state attorneys general to initiate federal litigation without waiting for federal enforcement action, potentially creating parallel state-level oversight of immigration detention decisions. This could increase the number of noncitizens held in DHS custody and generate litigation over whether specific cases meet the bill's criteria.
Immigration
Latest updateJan 7, 2025
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 264 - 159 (Roll no. 6). (text: CR H53-54)
Immigration
ImmigrationS-5-119Latest action: Jan 29, 20250 readersEnacted
Laken Riley Act
Sponsored by Katie Britt
Under current immigration law, the Department of Homeland Security has discretion in deciding whether to detain noncitizens pending removal proceedings. While DHS must detain certain categories of noncitizens—such as those convicted of specific crimes or deemed security threats—many others can be released on bond or parole. States have limited ability to challenge federal detention or release decisions. This discretionary system means that noncitizens charged with crimes like theft or burglary may be released into communities while their cases proceed, creating situations where states believe federal immigration enforcement is inadequate. The Laken Riley Act amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to take custody of and detain noncitizens who are charged with, arrested for, or convicted of theft, burglary, larceny, shoplifting, or assault of a law enforcement officer—or any crime resulting in death or serious bodily injury. DHS must issue a detainer for such individuals and take custody if they are not otherwise detained by federal, state, or local officials. The bill defines these crimes according to the jurisdiction where the acts occurred. Additionally, the bill grants state attorneys general standing to sue the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of State in federal court if they allege that detention or release decisions harm their state or residents, with courts required to expedite such cases. Implementation begins immediately upon enactment. DHS must identify noncitizens meeting the new detention criteria and issue detainers accordingly. States can file lawsuits in federal district court challenging federal detention or release decisions, with courts prioritizing these cases on their dockets. The bill lowers the threshold for proving state harm to include financial harm exceeding $100. This expands state authority over immigration enforcement and creates new litigation pathways, potentially increasing federal court caseloads and requiring DHS to detain more individuals, which will affect detention facility capacity and resources.
Immigration
Latest updateJan 29, 2025
Became Public Law No: 119-1.
Immigration
ImmigrationHR-30-119Latest action: Jan 17, 20253 readersPassed Chamber
Preventing Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act
Sponsored by Nancy Mace
Under current immigration law, the Department of Homeland Security can deny entry to or remove certain aliens convicted of crimes, but the grounds for inadmissibility and deportability related to violence against women are limited. While some violent crimes trigger removal, sex offenses, domestic violence, stalking, child abuse, and violations of protection orders are not uniformly treated as grounds for exclusion or deportation across all immigration statuses. This creates gaps where individuals convicted of these offenses may remain in the United States or gain entry despite their criminal histories. This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to expand the grounds for both inadmissibility and deportability. The Department of Homeland Security is directed to treat aliens convicted of, or who admit committing, sex offenses—defined by the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act—as inadmissible. The bill also makes inadmissible any alien convicted of or admitting to domestic violence, stalking, child abuse, child neglect, child abandonment, or violation of a protection order involving threats of violence, harassment, or bodily injury. For those already in the country, the bill establishes that aliens convicted of these same offenses become deportable, with domestic violence crimes now triggering removal regardless of whether the jurisdiction receives federal grant funding. Implementation occurs immediately upon enactment, as DHS applies these new grounds to visa applications, entry determinations, and removal proceedings. The bill does not create new funding requirements, instead directing existing DHS enforcement resources toward identifying and processing cases under the expanded grounds. The change affects pending immigration cases and future applications, potentially increasing deportation proceedings and reducing approvals for individuals with these convictions. Existing waivers and relief provisions remain available only where explicitly preserved in immigration law.
Immigration
Latest updateJan 16, 2025
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 274 - 145 (Roll no. 17). (text: CR H191)
Immigration
ImmigrationHR-134-119Latest action: Jan 3, 202524 readersIn Committee
Protecting our Communities from Sexual Predators Act
Sponsored by Vern Buchanan
Under current immigration law, the Department of Homeland Security can detain certain noncitizens pending removal proceedings based on specific criminal convictions or immigration violations. However, sexual assault offenses are not explicitly listed as grounds for mandatory detention, inadmissibility, or deportability in the Immigration and Nationality Act. This creates a gap where individuals charged with or convicted of sexual assault may not face automatic detention or removal, potentially allowing them to remain in the United States during immigration proceedings. This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to establish sexual assault as a ground for mandatory detention and removal. The Department of Homeland Security is required to detain noncitizens who are charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or admit to committing sexual assault and who are also deportable or inadmissible under existing immigration grounds. Additionally, the bill makes any alien convicted of, admitting to, or having committed acts constituting sexual assault inadmissible to the United States and deportable if already present. The definition of sexual assault referenced in the bill comes from the Violence Against Women Act. Implementation occurs immediately upon enactment. The bill does not appropriate new funding but directs DHS to apply these grounds within its existing detention and removal authority. The effect is to expand the categories of noncitizens subject to mandatory detention without bond hearings and to streamline removal proceedings for individuals with sexual assault convictions or admissions. This may increase the number of individuals held in immigration detention and accelerate deportation timelines for those cases, though the precise fiscal impact depends on how many noncitizens currently fall into these categories.
Immigration
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Immigration
ImmigrationHR-175-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20255 readersIn Committee
Deport Alien Gang Members Act
Sponsored by Tom McClintock
Under current immigration law, the Department of Homeland Security can remove aliens convicted of crimes of violence, drug trafficking, and certain other serious offenses. However, gang membership itself is not explicitly listed as a ground for inadmissibility or deportation. While immigration officers can consider gang affiliation as evidence of criminal activity, there is no standalone legal basis to deny entry or remove someone solely because they are associated with a criminal organization. This gap means that individuals with gang ties but no qualifying criminal conviction may remain in the country or enter it. The Deport Alien Gang Members Act amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to establish criminal gang membership as an independent ground for both inadmissibility and deportation. The Department of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, gains authority to designate groups of five or more persons as criminal gangs if they engage in drug trafficking, firearms offenses, crimes of violence, human trafficking, fraud, or related conduct. Any alien who is or has been a gang member, or who has promoted, conspired with, or participated in gang activities—whether inside or outside the United States—becomes deportable. Immigration officers, consular officers, and DHS officials can deny entry or initiate removal based on reasonable belief of gang association, without requiring proof of a specific criminal conviction. The designation process requires DHS to notify Congress seven days before publishing a gang designation in the Federal Register. Designated groups may petition for revocation after two years, and DHS must review designations every five years. Classified information may be used in designations and withheld from the designated group, though courts can review it in camera. Once a designation takes effect, aliens in removal proceedings cannot challenge its validity as a defense. The bill provides no new funding but directs existing DHS and Department of Justice resources toward implementation. Removal proceedings for gang-affiliated aliens would proceed through existing immigration courts, potentially increasing caseloads.
Immigration
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Immigration
ImmigrationHR-116-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20253 readersIn Committee
Stopping Border Surges Act
Sponsored by Andy Biggs
Under current law, unaccompanied children apprehended at the border receive heightened protections. The William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 requires that unaccompanied children from countries not contiguous to the United States be transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services within 72 hours and receive a hearing before an immigration judge. Children from Mexico and Canada face faster processing. Additionally, asylum law allows individuals to apply for protection based on persecution, and credible fear interviews—initial screenings to determine if an applicant has a plausible asylum claim—use a relatively permissive legal standard. Family detention is restricted by court settlements, and special immigrant juvenile status is available to children unable to reunify with either parent due to abuse or neglect. This bill substantially tightens these protections. The Department of Homeland Security must now return unaccompanied children from any country—not just contiguous ones—to their home country, though the Secretary of Health and Human Services may retain custody for up to 30 days. The bill eliminates the requirement that children receive a hearing within 14 days and removes the geographic distinction between contiguous and non-contiguous countries. For asylum, the bill raises the credible fear standard to "more probable than not" that statements are true, removes jurisdiction for certain asylum applications, and narrows eligibility for special immigrant juvenile status by requiring that reunification with at least one parent be possible. The Department of Homeland Security gains discretion to detain families together during immigration proceedings. Implementation begins immediately upon enactment for newly apprehended children. The bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to establish uniform procedures for recording asylum interviews and credible fear determinations, with standardized checklists for officers. No new funding is explicitly appropriated, suggesting implementation occurs within existing budgets. The changes eliminate protections previously established by court settlement (the Flores agreement), potentially reducing the number of children transferred to HHS custody and increasing family detention. Asylum approvals will likely decline under the higher credible fear standard, and fewer children will qualify for special immigrant juvenile status, affecting both the foster care system and long-term immigration outcomes.
Immigration
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Immigration
ImmigrationHR-50-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20253 readersIn Committee
KAMALA Act
Sponsored by Andy Biggs
The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 authorizes the Department of Housing and Urban Development to distribute Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) to states, cities, and tribal governments for housing, infrastructure, and social services. These grants have long been used flexibly by local jurisdictions to address community needs, including assistance programs that may serve residents regardless of immigration status. Currently, no federal restriction explicitly prohibits the use of these funds for persons who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents, though some programs have their own eligibility rules. The KAMALA Act imposes two new restrictions on CDBG funding. First, it prohibits the Department of Housing and Urban Development from using any grant funds made in fiscal year 2024 or later to assist persons who are not U.S. nationals or lawful permanent residents. Second, it bars HUD from awarding grants to any state, city, or tribal government that operates any housing or community development program—regardless of funding source—that provides assistance to such persons. This creates a blanket eligibility requirement tied to immigration status across an entire jurisdiction's housing and community development activities. Implementation would begin immediately for grants awarded in fiscal year 2024 onward. HUD would need to establish verification procedures and audit mechanisms to ensure compliance. Jurisdictions receiving CDBG funds would face pressure to either eliminate or restructure existing programs serving mixed-status populations or risk losing federal housing grants entirely. This could affect homeless services, emergency shelter programs, and community development initiatives in cities and counties that currently serve all residents regardless of status. The funding source remains existing CDBG appropriations; no new money is allocated.
Immigration
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Immigration
ImmigrationHR-61-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20252 readersIn Committee
Ensuring United Families at the Border Act
Sponsored by Andy Biggs
Under current law, the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 and related court settlements, including the Flores v. Meese agreement, establish standards for how the federal government detains immigrant children. These rules generally presume that children should not be detained and impose specific conditions on family detention — including requirements that detention facilities meet state licensing standards. The law distinguishes between unaccompanied children and children traveling with parents, with different protections applying to each group. This bill amends the William Wilberforce Act to clarify detention standards for children traveling with parents. The Department of Homeland Security is authorized to detain alien children who are not unaccompanied — meaning those traveling with a parent or guardian — under the same rules that apply to adult immigration cases, removing the presumption against their detention. The bill specifically permits DHS to maintain custody of parents charged only with misdemeanor illegal entry offenses and to detain those parents together with their children during pending immigration proceedings. Additionally, the bill preempts state licensing requirements, prohibiting states from requiring that immigration detention facilities holding children or families obtain state licenses. The changes take effect immediately upon enactment and apply retroactively to all prior actions. The bill does not specify new funding but operates within existing DHS detention authority and budgets. By removing the presumption against detaining accompanied children and eliminating state licensing oversight, the bill expands the federal government's capacity to hold families in immigration detention while reducing state-level regulatory requirements. This shifts detention standards away from the protections established by decades of litigation and toward alignment with general immigration enforcement procedures.
Immigration
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Immigration
ImmigrationHR-76-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20252 readersIn Committee
Fund and Complete the Border Wall Act
Sponsored by Andy Biggs
Currently, federal law authorizes border barrier construction but lacks a dedicated funding mechanism. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 requires the Department of Homeland Security to construct physical barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border, but appropriations depend on annual congressional action. Additionally, existing law limits how remittance transfers—money sent abroad by individuals—can be taxed, and the Form I-94 arrival/departure fee remains fixed at $6. These constraints have created uncertainty about sustained funding for border infrastructure and maintenance. This bill establishes a dedicated "Secure the Southern Border Fund" within the Treasury and directs multiple revenue streams into it. The Department of Homeland Security gains authority to use these funds for designing, constructing, and maintaining physical barriers and roads along the southern border, plus purchasing vehicles and equipment for Border Patrol agents. The bill requires the Department of State to reduce foreign aid to countries by $2,000 per apprehended illegal border crosser and transfer those savings to the fund. It also imposes a 5 percent fee on remittance transfers sent outside the United States and increases the Form I-94 processing fee from $6 to $25, with portions of both directed to the border fund. Implementation begins within 60 days of enactment, with the Department of Homeland Security required to complete border barrier construction by December 31, 2025. The Secretary gains broad authority to waive legal requirements to expedite construction. Foreign aid reductions take effect after annual reporting of apprehension data. The remittance fee system must be operational within 90 days. The bill modifies Fair Labor Standards Act requirements for Border Patrol agents, allowing compensation at 150 percent of regular rate for hours 80-100 in a 14-day work period. These changes create a permanent, multi-source funding stream independent of annual appropriations cycles.
Immigration
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.
Immigration
ImmigrationHR-47-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20252 readersIn Committee
VOICE Restoration Act
Sponsored by Jack Bergman
The Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement Office (VOICE) operated within U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement from 2017 to 2021, providing support services to victims and witnesses of crimes committed by people in the United States without legal immigration status. The office was established through executive action and subsequently terminated through a different executive order in 2021. Currently, no dedicated federal office within ICE systematically assists these crime victims or connects them to available services and resources. This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to re-establish VOICE as a permanent office within U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The office must adopt a victim-centered approach to support crime victims, witnesses, and their legal representatives. VOICE will operate a toll-free hotline to answer victim questions, maintain local contacts to address individual requests, connect victims with social service professionals who can refer them to resources, enable victims to receive automated updates on the custody status of accused aliens, and provide criminal and immigration history information to victims and their families. VOICE must begin publishing quarterly reports to Congress, the Department of Homeland Security, and the President within 180 days of the bill's enactment, documenting the effects of crimes committed by aliens without legal status. The bill does not specify a funding source or implementation timeline beyond the reporting requirement. The office will operate as part of ICE's existing structure, potentially requiring budget reallocation or new appropriations to establish the hotline, hire staff, and maintain databases for custody status tracking and victim notification.
Immigration
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Immigration
ImmigrationHR-103-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20252 readersIn Committee
Congressional Border Security Assessment Act
Sponsored by Andy Biggs
Currently, Indian reservations are sovereign tribal lands where tribal governments exercise jurisdiction and control access. Federal law recognizes tribal sovereignty and the authority of tribal nations to regulate who enters their territories. Members of Congress and their staff do not automatically have the right to enter Indian reservations without permission from the tribe. This creates a situation where congressional delegations seeking to inspect border security conditions on tribal lands must negotiate access with tribal authorities, which can delay or prevent such assessments. The Congressional Border Security Assessment Act directs the federal government to grant Members of Congress and accompanying congressional staff lawful access to any Indian reservation containing 50 or more contiguous miles of the U.S.-Mexico border. This access extends to roadways and easements on Indian country as defined under 18 U.S.C. Section 1151. The bill establishes this access right for the explicit purpose of obtaining information to assess national security, public safety, and international boundary security. By creating this statutory right, the bill overrides the need for tribes to grant permission before congressional delegations enter their lands for border security inspections. Once enacted, the bill takes immediate effect, allowing any Member of Congress to enter qualifying tribal lands without prior tribal consent. The legislation contains no funding provisions, implementation timeline, or coordination mechanism with tribal governments. The practical effect is that congressional delegations can conduct border security assessments on tribal territories independently, potentially affecting tribal governance of their own lands and creating tensions between congressional oversight authority and tribal sovereignty. Tribes retain no explicit authority to deny access or set conditions on these congressional visits.
Immigration
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Immigration