Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
This bill amends INA section 236(c) to require the Department of Homeland Security to detain certain noncitizens. It adds inadmissible aliens under 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(6)(A), (6)(C), or (7) who are charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or admit to burglary, theft, larceny, shoplifting, assault of a law enforcement officer, or any crime causing death or serious bodily injury.
Liberal emphasizes civil liberties, due process, and community policing impacts
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that expands mandatory detention grounds by adding specified theft-related and violent offenses and imposing a detainer/custody obligation on DHS.
This bill amends INA section 236(c) to require the Department of Homeland Security to detain certain noncitizens.
It adds inadmissible aliens under 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(6)(A), (6)(C), or (7) who are charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or admit to burglary, theft, larceny, shoplifting, assault of a law enforcement officer, or any crime causing death or serious bodily injury.
The bill directs DHS to issue a detainer and take custody if the person is not otherwise detained, and it ties statutory terms to the definitions used in the jurisdiction where the acts occurred.
Technically narrow but high ideological salience and litigation exposure reduce prospects; feasibility depends on chamber priorities and willingness to accept enforcement mandates and costs.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that expands mandatory detention grounds by adding specified theft-related and violent offenses and imposing a detainer/custody obligation on DHS. It is precise in how it modifies existing statute but leaves out fiscal, procedural, and oversight detail.
Liberal emphasizes civil liberties, due process, and community policing impacts
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberal emphasizes civil liberties, due process, and community policing impacts
Likely to oppose the bill as an unnecessary expansion of mandatory detention that raises civil liberties and racial profiling concerns.
Would worry it removes local prosecutorial discretion and risks chilling community cooperation with police.
Mixed view: supports objectives of public safety and removing dangerous individuals, but concerned about mandatory detention, cost, and operational feasibility.
Would seek clarifications and safeguards before endorsement.
Likely to strongly support the bill as closing a perceived loophole that lets inadmissible or fraudulent-entry aliens avoid custody after criminal allegations.
Views it as strengthening public safety and law enforcement authority.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically narrow but high ideological salience and litigation exposure reduce prospects; feasibility depends on chamber priorities and willingness to accept enforcement mandates and costs.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberal emphasizes civil liberties, due process, and community policing impacts
Technically narrow but high ideological salience and litigation exposure reduce prospects; feasibility depends on chamber priorities and wi…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that expands mandatory detention grounds by adding specified theft-related and violent offenses and imposing a detainer/custo…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.