PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 27, 2025
Unhandcuffing Police to Locate and Interdict Foreign Transgressors Act or the UPLIFT Act
This bill requires additional cooperation from state and local governments in federal immigration enforcement.
Under current law, state and local governments are prohibited from implementing a ban on or in any way restricting the sharing of information regarding an individual’s immigration status with federal agencies. The bill expands the prohibition to include any ban or restriction on complying with federal immigration laws or policies or on assisting or cooperating with federal law enforcement.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Additionally, state and local governments may not prohibit (1) inquiring about the immigration status of an individual who is suspected of involvement in a crime, (2) notifying the federal government of certain encounters, and (3) complying with federal requests for such information.
The bill also expands the standard for the issuance of a detainer by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Under the bill, DHS may issue a detainer for an individual who is arrested on criminal charges or for a motor vehicle violation (currently, for drug violations) if DHS has probable cause that the individual is inadmissible or deportable. Probable cause may be established through methods including an identification match, voluntary statements made, or through other means.
Federal immunity is also generally extended to state and local officials and government contractors who comply with a DHS detainer.
The bill also allows legal challenges against (1) state governments and local governments brought by certain crime victims, and (2) state governments brought by local jurisdictions.
People & committees
Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8] · R–CO
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 currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 7, 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.1680 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.1680 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.1680 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.1680 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.