Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house Rejected June 27th, 2018
    Roll Call Vote 121 Yea / 301 Nay
      house Committees
      House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
      Water Resources and Environment
      Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials
      Highways and Transit
      Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
      Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
      Aviation
      House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
      House Committee on the Budget
      House Committee on Foreign Affairs
      House Committee on Armed Services
      House Committee on Energy and Commerce
      House Committee on Ways and Means
      House Committee on Natural Resources
      House Committee on Agriculture
      House Committee on Homeland Security
      House Committee on the Judiciary
    IntroducedJune 19th, 2018

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!

What is it?

This bill — the Border Security and Immigration Reform Act of 2018 — would provide $23.4 billion in funding for border security, grant legal status to 1.8 million “Dreamers”, eliminate the Diversity Visa lottery program as part of a transition toward a merit-based immigration system, and reform asylum laws. It’d also address the separation of unauthorized immigrant family minors and unaccompanied minors, and encourage sanctuary cities and states to honor federal detainers for unauthorized immigrants they take into custody for other crimes. A summary of its various provisions can be found below.

BORDER ENFORCEMENT

Infrastructure & Equipment: The Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS) would be required to take necessary actions to design, test, build, install, and operate physical barriers, tactical infrastructure (like roads and lights), and technology along the U.S. border to deter and prevent illegal immigration and activities. This requirement wouldn’t apply in areas where natural terrain, natural barriers, or remoteness make such measures ineffective.

All physical barriers and tactical infrastructure needed to achieve control of the border would have to be in place by the end of the 2023 fiscal year. Before that date, DHS would be required to coordinate with relevant federal, state, and local agencies and begin eradicating carrizo cane and salt cedar along the Rio Grande River that impedes border security.

The National Guard could be used to secure the border through building barriers, operating ground- or aerial-surveillance assets. Their assistance would be subject to approval from DHS, the Dept. of Defense (DOD), and the state’s governor and would only be permitted if it doesn’t adversely impact readiness or training.

Personnel: Customs and Border Protection (CBP) would be required to maintain an active duty presence of at least 26,370 agents, 27,725 officers, including at least 1,939 air and marine operations agents by September 30, 2023.

CBP would also be required to increase the number of K-9 units with supporting personnel by at least 300; the number of horseback units by at least 100 officers and 50 horses; the number of officers on search and rescue operations by 50; and the number officers of tunnel detection and apprehension teams by 50. CBP would be authorized to pay retention bonuses to its employees of up to 50 percent of basic pay for certain employees.

Grants: HHS would make grants available under Operation Stonegarden to states which border Canada, Mexico, or have a maritime border to for equipment, personnel, or other appropriate activities as determined by the Commissioner of CBP.

IMMIGRATION REFORM

Legal Status for Certain Childhood Arrivals: This section would create a renewable, six year legal status for eligible unauthorized immigrants known as “contingent nonimmigrant status” which would allow them to apply for green cards (lawful permanent resident status) after five years. Unauthorized immigrants would be eligible for contingent nonimmigrant status if they:

  • Are physically present in the U.S. when they make their application and were physically present in the U.S. on June 15, 2007;

  • Were younger than 16 years of age when they first entered the country;

  • Were under 31 years of age on June 15, 2012 and had no lawful immigration status on that date;

  • Are of good moral character and have requested the release of any juvenile court records to DHS;

  • Have maintained continuous physical presence in the U.S. from June 15, 2012 until they’re granted contingent nonimmigrant status;

  • Have obtained a high school diploma or an equivalent in the U.S. or are enrolled full-time at an educational institution.

Unauthorized immigrants would be ineligible for contingent nonimmigrant status if they have:

  • A felony conviction or an aggravated felony;

  • A misdemeanor conviction for domestic violence, child abuse or neglect, assault resulting in bodily injury; or violating a protection order;

  • A conviction for sexual assault at any time;

  • One or more offenses classified as misdemeanors involving driving while intoxicated (DWI) or driving under the influence (DUI);

  • Two or more misdemeanors for any offenses unrelated to driving under the influence or causing physical bodily harm;

  • Juvenile convictions for offenses related to murder, manslaughter, homicide, rape, statutory rape, any offense of a sexual nature involving a victim under the age of 18, a crime of violence, or drug dealing;

  • Failed to comply with a removal order or voluntary departure agreement or are deportable or inadmissible for specified reasons.

Contingent nonimmigrants over the age of 18 would have to demonstrate an ability to support themselves with an annual income that’s at least 125 percent of the federal poverty level throughout the period they have contingent non-immigrant status. They’d be exempt from this requirement if they’re enrolled in school, are physically or mentally disabled, or are the caregiver of either a child under the age of 18 or an adult who is incapable of self-care because of a disability.

Contingent nonimmigrants would have to request authorization by DHS to travel outside the country and be re-admitted, and couldn’t be outside the U.S. for more than 180 days during each 6 year period they’re in contingent non-immigrant status. There would be exceptions for extenuating circumstances and military service.

The application period would be open for one year after DHS publishes its interim final rule for contingent non-immigrant applications. The process would include completing a form that includes the provision of tax documents, documents demonstrating identity (like a passport, birth certificate), a certified school transcript (as needed to comply with education requirements), and an interview. A one-time border security fee of $1,000 would also be required as part of the application process.

Unauthorized immigrants apprehended before or during the application process would be given an opportunity would be given an opportunity to apply for contingent non-immigrant status if they appear eligible for such status. Their ability to apply would be rescinded if they become ineligible for one of the above reasons, or if DHS determines their removal to be in the interest of national security.

Visa Allocations & Priorities: The Diversity Visa Program, which allocates visas by lottery each year to immigrants from countries with low levels of immigration to the U.S., would be eliminated and those visas would be reallocated to other classifications.

The per-country cap on immigration — which currently limits the percentage of visas awarded to citizens of an individual foreign country each year to 7% of all visas — would be increased to 15% for a single country. The per-country cap on employment-based visas would be eliminated, while family-sponsored visas would be capped at 15% of all visas.

Of visas available to skilled workers for fiscal year 2019, 15% would be allotted to immigrants from countries that weren’t one of the two largest countries in terms of immigrants receiving visas the prior year. It’d then decrease to 10% in each of the 2020 and 2021 fiscal years.

No more than 25 percent of reserved visas could go to immigrants from one country, while no more than 85 percent of unreserved visas could go to immigrants from one country. Those limitations wouldn’t apply if they’d prevent all available visas from being used before the end of a fiscal year.

Visas would be made available to children of individuals with contingent nonimmigrant status based on a point system, with visas being awarded first to applicants with the highest point totals. Points would be awarded based on academic achievement ranging from 4 to 40 points with more points awarded for degrees in STEM fields and those obtained at U.S. academic institutions; work experience (computed as ⅓ of the points of their education level at the time multiplied by each two year period of experience); service in the U.S. Armed Forces (30 points); and level of English language proficiency (up to 10 points). Total point scores would remain valid until the application is approved or denied, and only applicants with scores over 12 points could be awarded visas.

For fiscal year 2025, 470,000 visas for contingent nonimmigrants and eligible children of contingent nonimmigrants would be issued. Each fiscal year thereafter another 78,400 would be issued plus any unused visas from the prior fiscal year. Contingent nonimmigrants would be able to request an immigration visa within five years of receiving contingent nonimmigrant status.

Each year 205,000 employment-based immigrant visas would be made available, except for the 2020 fiscal year when they’d total 175,000 visas.

Family-sponsored immigration would be reformed to eliminate preferences for married sons and daughters of U.S. citizens and for brothers and sisters of citizens.

Addressing Family Separation: This section would require DHS to maintain custody of unauthorized immigrants who enter the country with children, as those children are currently transferred to shelters run by the Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS) while their parents await hearings. Funding would be provided for family detention space to facilitate this requirement.

If the adult is charged with felonies or other criminal activity they wouldn’t be detained along with the children. It would be prohibited to release a child to any individual other than a parent or legal guardian to enhance their safety.

Unaccompanied Children: This section would aim to ensure that unaccompanied children who enter the country illegally are returned to their home as quickly and safely as possible. The unaccompanied children would be interviewed in private by unarmed, plain-clothes DHS personnel with training in detecting human trafficking to ensure they’re not victims of trafficking.

So long as the unaccompanied children aren’t trafficking victims, don’t have a credible of persecution upon returning to their home country, or withdraw a request to enter the U.S. they’d be returned to their home country. If they don’t meet those criteria, they’d be transferred into the custody of the Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS) within 30 days, and information about the individuals (ie foster parents) who take custody of the children would be provided to DHS. Special immigrant juvenile status would be granted to unauthorized immigrant children who are unable to reunite with either parent.

Interior Immigration Enforcement: DHS It could detain unauthorized immigrants during the removal period that begins when they’re ordered to be removed by a court or immigration judge. DHS could continue to detain such an unauthorized immigrant beyond the removal period if their detention is extended and there’s a reasonable likelihood they’ll be removed soon or they haven’t made any effort to comply with the removal order. Unauthorized immigrants who are released but fail to comply with the terms of their removal order could be re-detained.

Additionally, unauthorized immigrants committing aggravated felonies of several classifications or gang membership would be grounds for inadmissibility or deportability.

DHS would be given increased authority to issue detainers for inadmissible or deportable unauthorized immigrants, including those arrested by federal, state or local law enforcement for alleged violations of laws related to driving under the influence. DHS could take them into custody within 48 hours (excluding weekends and holidays) — and in no circumstances more than 96 hours after their release by the federal, state, or local law enforcement agency. Those agencies would be immune from liability for relaying that information.

Individuals — or the spouse, parent, or child of a deceased victim — would have the authority to file a private right of action against a state or local government if such government entity refuses to honor a DHS detainer and the unauthorized immigrant subsequently commits murder, rape, or sexual abuse and is imprisoned for at least one year. Victims would have up to 10 years to file a claim.

Asylum Reform: DHS would be required to conduct “credible fear interviews” to determine if asylum claims are likely true, which would structured and recorded in a uniform way for quality assurance purposes. Any sworn statement would be accompanied by a supporting interview to the greatest extent possible, and interpreters could be used so long as they aren’t affiliated with the government of the country from which an asylum-seeker comes.

Asylum application forms would include a written warning of the consequences for filing a frivolous claim and penalties for asylum fraud would be established. Asylum seekers could also be removed to a safe third country as determined by DHS.

BORDER SECURITY FUNDING

This section would authorize and provide $23.4 billion in funding to be used for border barrier construction, along with related infrastructure and technology in annual installments through fiscal year 2026. Of the total, $16.625 bill would go toward building barriers, roads, and installing lighting while $6.775 billion would go to technology infrastructure, including the development and operation of a biometric entry-exit system.

If any of the border security funding in this bill is rescinded, the contingent nonimmigrant status extended to Dreamers would be revoked.

VISA SECURITY & INTEGRITY

This section of the bill would aim to prevent visa overstays by requiring the implementation of a biometric entry-exit system at all ports of entry into the U.S.

DHS personnel would be assigned to U.S. embassies and consulates in a risk-based manner to screen visa applications, including a social media review of visa applicants. Visa interviews could only be waived if the applicant is a threat to national security or they’re otherwise ineligible.

DHS would be required to continuously crosscheck individuals issued a visa against federal criminal, national security, and terrorism databases.

MISCELLANEOUS

If a court carrying out a judicial review of a statutory or regulatory provision of this bill finds an ambiguity, it would be prohibited from interpreting that ambiguity as an implied delegation of authority to the agency or an expansion of the agency’s authority.

Impact

Unauthorized immigrants; state and local governments and law enforcement; HHS; courts; and DHS.

Cost

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

More Information

In-Depth: House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) introduced this bill to provide funding for border security and legal status to Dreamers, create a merit-based immigration system, and keep unauthorized immigrant families together as much as possible when apprehended:

“This bill brings our immigration system into the 21st century, contains a number of tools to enhance border security, prevents illegal immigration, and combats fraud: It also provides those were brought to the U.S. illegally as children an opportunity to earn a legal status. Importantly, the bill creates a new, merit-based system that is directly tied to the funding for the border wall, and the bill transitions some green card categories from extended family-based purposes to programs that reward those with the skills, work experience and education needed in the U.S. If Congress down the road seeks to rescind the funding for the border wall, new visas will not be allocated.”

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) urged Democrats to oppose the bill, writing:

"This Speaker Ryan anti-family values bill should be seen as what it is: an anti-immigrant, hastily-constructed attempt to appease various factions of the Republican Conference in order to avoid another embarrassing defeat on the House floor."


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell

(Photo Credit: Michal Ludwiczak / iStock)

AKA

Border Security and Immigration Reform Act of 2018

Official Title

To amend the immigration laws and provide for border security, and for other purposes.

    This bill was designed with the voices of members of Congress and their constituents in mind. No bill is perfect, including this one, but it does try offer solutions for all sides. Everyone must concede a little ground and put aside party agendas to start reforming a totally outdated and dysfunctional immigration system.
    Like (123)
    Follow
    Share
    No. No wall, no “merit-based” immigration. Allow the immigration courts to handle these matters, not criminal courts. We need a separate, clean DACA bill that gives these people a clear path to citizenship.
    Like (404)
    Follow
    Share
    $23 billion for a Wall? No. You can’t hold dreamers and innocent children hostage to get the “border security” Trump wants.
    Like (280)
    Follow
    Share
    trump’s wall is like suggesting one of the most technologically-advanced nations on earth adopt a six-year-old’s fantasy solution against the boogieman. It is so insulting that we’re discussing funding a demagogue’s plans to make himself look tough on TV instead of deferring to experts and real solutions for immigration and security. Put informed people in charge again for protecting our nation. Make trump pay for his boogieman mumbo jumbo and leave taxpayers out of this! (PS—possible damage to animal migrations is worse itself than the benefits of a wall against immigrants/ trafficking).
    Like (260)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill is trying to hide funding for the wall and going after sanctuary cities behind “fixing” family separation. Quit lumping issues together to try and push them through, pull out the good bipartisan pieces, pass them, and debate and edit the rest like an actual congress.
    Like (108)
    Follow
    Share
    Let’s just say it for the infinitieth time: The wall will do nothing. Immigration reform, to be meaningful, needs to be both humane and human. Any Republican proposal is likely to fall short on at least one of these criteria, at least while the most xenophobic president in US history sits in the Oval Office.
    Like (74)
    Follow
    Share
    Not a dime to build a wall. It is nonsense to build a wall in the first place - but we were told Mexico was going to pay for it. The great deal maker couldn’t pull it off.
    Like (65)
    Follow
    Share
    No wall. No way, no how.
    Like (56)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a no-brainer, a sovereign nation must know the number of non-citizens in their country in order to properly manage immigration policy. For too long Democrats and businesses have subordinated the individual rights of our citizens to the benefit of illegal non-citizens. People who want to immigrate to our country must come here through the legal process and prove that they are coming here to contribute to our nation and not be a drain on us hard working law-abiding citizens. Anything else is unsustainable. Build the wall!
    Like (52)
    Follow
    Share
    We need a clean DREAM Act that doesn’t give $20+ million to please Trump.
    Like (49)
    Follow
    Share
    NO WALL
    Like (45)
    Follow
    Share
    I would prefer the original Goodlatte bill, but if there are not enough votes for that this is not a bad compromise. What does countable have this as passing the house? I’ve seen through other sources that it failed to pass the House.
    Like (42)
    Follow
    Share
    Just some more GOP bullshit.
    Like (31)
    Follow
    Share
    Stop trying the most useless and most expensive option. A wall is a waste of time and money and solves nothing.
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    Don't give in to Trump and the hardliners; we can do better.
    Like (24)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes, please. This bill addresses the issue of Kids brought to the country by their parents without directly benefitting the offenders (parents). It also provides for a physical border to eliminate the need for future “fixes”. It addresses the sanctuary city issue and provides for the removal of gang influences. I approve.
    Like (23)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a no-brainer, common sense solution that has been long over-looked by both parties. Vote “Yeah” on this one!
    Like (22)
    Follow
    Share
    I support this bill. Build the wall!! Put an end to sanctuary states and cities. The families that cross the border illegally need a one way ticket back to where they came from. If they are seeking asylum, they need to stay in Mexico.
    Like (21)
    Follow
    Share
    Border Patrol, after going through numerous tests, has determined that the wall would help in reducing illegal immigration. And counties cannot just block ICE access that’s just plain subversive and dangerous. And we need a merit-based system. So instead of giving visas to anyone, we prioritize those who benefit us the most.
    Like (21)
    Follow
    Share
    Clearly the Democrats are trying to bring in new voters because they've lost the American vote. The border must be sealed up or American values will fade. New arrivals, dreamers, etc. should not be allowed to vote for 10 years, until they can learn OUR politics, period
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE