PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Luttrell, Morgan [R-TX-8] · R–TX
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 18, 2025. 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.1714 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.1714 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.1714 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.1714 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 · 2025-02-27 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 require a report to Congress about people whose permission to be in the United States comes from immigration parole and who have committed crimes here. The report would count those people, identify their nationalities, and include any ties to terrorists or criminal groups operating across national borders. It would be due within 60 days after enactment.
Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to Congress a report on number of individuals who are present in the United States pursuant to a grant of parole under the Processes for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans or any other grant of parole under section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)) who have committed crimes in the United States, including the nationalities of such individuals, and any ties of such individuals to terrorists and transnational criminal groups.
The Secretary of Homeland Security would be responsible for submitting the report to Congress. The 60-day deadline would begin upon enactment.
Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to Congress a report
The report would cover people present under the parole processes for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans, as well as any other parole granted under the cited immigration-law provision, who have committed crimes in the United States.
individuals who are present in the United States pursuant to a grant of parole under the Processes for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans or any other grant of parole under section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)) who have committed crimes in the United States
The report would have to state the number of covered individuals, their nationalities, and any ties they have to terrorists and transnational criminal groups.
a report on number of individuals
including the nationalities of such individuals, and any ties of such individuals to terrorists and transnational criminal groups.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated March 18, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on the Judiciary on February 27, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-03-18T14:40:40Z. 2025-02-27: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-02-27: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-27. 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 in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not cover 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 in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish the contents of other versions or accompanying earmark materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow benefit, special exemption, or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Mar 18, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI