PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 13, 2025
This bill expands the E-3 visa program to cover Irish nationals. The E-3 visa is a nonimmigrant visa currently only available to Australian nationals coming to the United States for employment in a specialty occupation. For Irish E-3 initial applications, the Department of State may approve each fiscal year no more than 10,500 minus the number of Australian initial applications approved the previous fiscal year.
People & committees
Rep. Neal, Richard E. [D-MA-1] · D–MA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 4, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.
Analyze H.R.1337 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.
Examine H.R.1337 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.
Examine H.R.1337 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.
Examine H.R.1337 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.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-13 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.
This bill would extend the referenced E–3 visa category to Irish nationals, subject to a reciprocity determination by the Secretary of State. For an attestation filed concerning an Irish national in this category, the employer would have to be and remain an E-Verify participant in good standing throughout that person's authorized employment. Initial approvals for Irish applicants would be limited by a formula based on the previous fiscal year's Australian approvals. Spouses and children would not count toward the numerical limits.
by inserting or, on a basis of reciprocity as determined by the Secretary of State, a national of Ireland, after Australia.
In the case of an attestation filed with respect to a national of Ireland described in section 101(a)(15)(E)(iii), the employer is, and will remain during the period of authorized employment of such Irish national, a participant in good standing in the E-Verify program described in section 403(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note).
For applicants who are nationals of Ireland, not more than a number equal to the difference between 10,500 and the number of applications approved in the prior fiscal year for aliens who are nationals of the Commonwealth of Australia.
The numerical limitation under subparagraph (A) shall only apply to principal aliens and not to the spouses or children of such aliens.
The proposed Irish eligibility would depend on the Secretary of State determining reciprocity—corresponding treatment between the countries. The bill does not specify what reciprocal arrangements would satisfy that condition.
Section 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(E)(iii)) is amended by inserting or, on a basis of reciprocity as determined by the Secretary of State, a national of Ireland, after Australia.
For an employer filing the specified attestation—a formal statement—concerning an Irish national in this category, E-Verify participation in good standing would be mandatory throughout that person's authorized employment.
In the case of an attestation filed with respect to a national of Ireland described in section 101(a)(15)(E)(iii), the employer is, and will remain during the period of authorized employment of such Irish national, a participant in good standing in the E-Verify program described in section 403(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note).
The Secretary of State could approve no more than 10,500 initial Australian applications per fiscal year. Initial Irish approvals would be capped at 10,500 minus the number of Australian applications approved in the previous fiscal year. These are approval ceilings, not requirements to approve that many applications.
The Secretary of State may approve initial applications submitted for aliens described in section 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) only as follows: (i) For applicants who are nationals of the Commonwealth of Australia, not more than 10,500 for a fiscal year. (ii) For applicants who are nationals of Ireland, not more than a number equal to the difference between 10,500 and the number of applications approved in the prior fiscal year for aliens who are nationals of the Commonwealth of Australia.
For counting against the numerical limits, an Irish application approval would be treated as occurring on September 30 of the previous fiscal year.
The approval of an application described under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be deemed for numerical control purposes to have occurred on September 30 of the prior fiscal year.
The numerical limits would apply only to the main applicants. Their spouses and children would not count toward those limits.
The numerical limitation under subparagraph (A) shall only apply to principal aliens and not to the spouses or children of such aliens.
The bill would also relabel the specified second subsection (t) of section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as subsection (u).
by redesignating the second subsection (t) (as added by section 1(b)(2)(B) of Public Law 108–449 (118 Stat. 3470)) as subsection (u)
The supplied actions snapshot, updated March 4, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on the Judiciary on February 13, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-03-04T02:20:18Z. 2025-02-13: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-02-13: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-13. 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.
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 after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in accompanying materials or other versions.
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 beyond ordinary program coverage was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. Intended program beneficiaries and routine administration alone do not warrant a finding. This conclusion is limited to the supplied version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Mar 4, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI