PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.J.Res.22 / 119th Congress

Disapproving of the rule submitted by the Department of Homeland Security relating to "Modernizing H-1B Requirements, Providing Flexibility in the F-1 Program, and Program Improvements Affecting Other Nonimmigrant Workers".

Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 16, 2025

This joint resolution nullifies the final rule issued by the Department of Homeland Security titled Modernizing H-1B Requirements, Providing Flexibility in the F-1 Program, and Program Improvements Affecting Other Nonimmigrant Workers and published on December 18, 2024. The rule revises several regulations applicable to nonimmigrant visas for workers in specialty occupations (H-1B), nonimmigrant visas for students (F-1), and other visas, including by 

adding to the criteria for specialty occupations; 

extending the employment authorization period for F-1 visa holders who are beneficiaries of H-1B petitions; and 

requiring H-1B petitioners to have bona fide job offers for beneficiaries and have legal presence in, and be subject to the legal processes of, the United States. 

Read the summary on Congress.gov

Who introduced it

Rep. Arrington, Jodey C. [R-TX-19] · R–TX

Committees

  • Judiciary Committee
2 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

  2. Introduced in House

  3. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Jan 14, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.J.Res.22 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.J.Res.22 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.J.Res.22 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.J.Res.22 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.

View full prompt & sources

Read the proposal in plain language

AI-generated · Source-checked by AI · Oct 20, 2026

Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-01-16 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.

What it would do

If enacted, this resolution would cancel a Department of Homeland Security rule addressing H–1B requirements, flexibility in the F–1 program, and other nonimmigrant workers. The supplied resolution does not describe the underlying requirements or explain how canceling them would affect people in those programs.

Check the source
That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Department of Homeland Security relating to Modernizing H–1B Requirements, Providing Flexibility in the F–1 Program, and Program Improvements Affecting Other Nonimmigrant Workers (89 Fed. Reg. 103054), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
Official bill text · Introduced in House · 2025-01-16

How it would work

The resolution identifies the rule by its Federal Register reference, 89 Fed. Reg. 103054, and would give that rule no legal force or effect. Its operative language contains no exceptions or separate implementation date.

Check the source
That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Department of Homeland Security relating to Modernizing H–1B Requirements, Providing Flexibility in the F–1 Program, and Program Improvements Affecting Other Nonimmigrant Workers (89 Fed. Reg. 103054), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
Official bill text · Introduced in House · 2025-01-16

What the record shows

The supplied January 14, 2026 source snapshot records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on the Judiciary on January 16, 2025.

Check the source
Source snapshot updated 2026-01-14T16:38:48Z. 2025-01-16: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-01-16: Introduced in House
Official legislative record · 2026-01-14T16:38:48Z

Riders & Targeted Benefits

Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-01-16. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.

This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.

Riders

Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.

None identified in the reviewed text

No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.

Earmarks

Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.

None identified in the reviewed text

No directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.

Other targeted benefits

Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.

None identified in the reviewed text

No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.

What this analysis cannot establish

  • The underlying rule is not supplied. Its detailed requirements, affected populations, and the practical consequences of canceling it cannot be established from this bundle.
  • The introduced text is a proposal, not evidence of enacted law. The supplied action snapshot does not establish subsequent advancement or enactment; missing actions do not prove that neither occurred.
  • The bundle contains no member requests, earmark disclosures, committee reports, or conference materials. The spending review is limited to the supplied introduced text.

Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jan 14, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI