Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
This bill amends the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to bar use of grants made under section 106 for assisting persons who are neither U.S. nationals nor lawfully admitted for permanent residence. It also prohibits HUD from awarding grants to any State, unit of local government, or Indian tribe that operates any housing or community development program providing such assistance.
Progressives emphasize harms to vulnerable communities and public health
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward substantive statutory amendment that clearly articulates a legal prohibition and targets specific provisions of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974.
This bill amends the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to bar use of grants made under section 106 for assisting persons who are neither U.S. nationals nor lawfully admitted for permanent residence.
It also prohibits HUD from awarding grants to any State, unit of local government, or Indian tribe that operates any housing or community development program providing such assistance.
The restriction applies to grants made in fiscal year 2024 and succeeding fiscal years.
Substantive immigration-linked restriction on major federal grants is politically contentious, legally uncertain, and lacks compromise features, lowering enactment odds.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward substantive statutory amendment that clearly articulates a legal prohibition and targets specific provisions of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. It is limited in drafting detail beyond the core prohibitions.
Progressives emphasize harms to vulnerable communities and public health
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize harms to vulnerable communities and public health
Likely to oppose the bill as written.
They would view it as excluding undocumented immigrants from vital housing and community services, creating public-health and safety risks, and undermining local discretion.
They would also anticipate legal and civil‑rights challenges and a chilling effect on service delivery.
Mixed view: supports fiscal accountability and rule‑of‑law intent but worries about practical harms and costs.
Concerns would focus on administrative verification, unintended exclusion of needy households, and potential federal‑local conflicts.
They would seek narrow, targeted amendments and clarifying language.
Generally supportive.
They would see the bill as ensuring taxpayer funds are not used to assist undocumented immigrants and as a tool to discourage sanctuary policies.
They would favor strict enforcement and view the measure as consistent with immigration law and fiscal accountability.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Substantive immigration-linked restriction on major federal grants is politically contentious, legally uncertain, and lacks compromise features, lowering enactment odds.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize harms to vulnerable communities and public health
Substantive immigration-linked restriction on major federal grants is politically contentious, legally uncertain, and lacks compromise feat…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward substantive statutory amendment that clearly articulates a legal prohibition and targets specific provisions of the Housing and Community Develop…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.