Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
The bill requires the Secretary of State to deny or revoke F- and M-category student visas for aliens who engage in defined "prohibited antisemitic conduct" and who the Secretary determines would pose potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences. It adopts the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism (including contemporary examples as adopted by the State Department) and specifies prohibited conduct as violent acts, vandalism, harassment targeting Jewish persons/property/institutions, or knowingly providing material support for such acts.
Progressives emphasize free-speech and academic-freedom risks
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive amendment to immigration law that clearly states its objective and integrates with existing INA provisions, while providing statutory definitions for the targeted conduct.
The bill requires the Secretary of State to deny or revoke F- and M-category student visas for aliens who engage in defined "prohibited antisemitic conduct" and who the Secretary determines would pose potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences.
It adopts the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism (including contemporary examples as adopted by the State Department) and specifies prohibited conduct as violent acts, vandalism, harassment targeting Jewish persons/property/institutions, or knowingly providing material support for such acts.
The measure adds these conditions to INA section 214 and ties visa action to the foreign-policy consequences standard in INA 237(a)(4)(C)(i).
Content is narrow and administratively feasible, lowering barriers, but controversy around speech, IHRA usage, and diplomatic implications reduce chances.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive amendment to immigration law that clearly states its objective and integrates with existing INA provisions, while providing statutory definitions for the targeted conduct. The bill does not, however, provide detailed implementation procedures, evidence or due-process safeguards, fiscal considerations, or accountability mechanisms that would be reasonably expected for administrating visa denial and revocation authority.
Progressives emphasize free-speech and academic-freedom risks
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize free-speech and academic-freedom risks
Supports strong measures against violence and antisemitic hate, but is concerned about civil liberties and academic freedom.
Worries IHRA examples could conflate protected speech or political protest with antisemitism if applied broadly.
Would seek clearer safeguards and due-process protections.
Sees this as a targeted tool to revoke visas for students involved in violent antisemitic acts, but wants clearer definitions and procedural safeguards.
Concerned about vague "potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences" standard and administrative discretion.
Favors stronger enforcement against antisemitism and supports using visa authority to remove foreign nationals who commit or support violent hate.
Appreciates the national-security/foreign-policy rationale and existing legal hooks for revocation.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is narrow and administratively feasible, lowering barriers, but controversy around speech, IHRA usage, and diplomatic implications reduce chances.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize free-speech and academic-freedom risks
Content is narrow and administratively feasible, lowering barriers, but controversy around speech, IHRA usage, and diplomatic implications…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive amendment to immigration law that clearly states its objective and integrates with existing INA provisions, while providing statutory definitions for…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.