PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 6, 2025
Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal Act of 2025 or the CLEAR Act of 2025
This bill establishes requirements and programs related to the detention of individuals unlawfully present in the United States and facing removal, including the role of state and local governments in this process.
The bill provides that state and local governments have the authority to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration laws, including by apprehending individuals and transferring them to federal custody. Jurisdictions that prohibit such cooperation are barred from receiving certain federal funding.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) must within 48 hours of a request by a state or local authority take custody of an individual unlawfully present in the United States. The bill also establishes requirements for state or local detention and provides for reimbursement for reasonable expenses. The Government Accountability Office must also audit such reimbursements.
DHS must also construct 20 additional detention facilities in the United States for individuals facing removal.
The bill also (1) extends certain federal immunity from liability to state and local law enforcement officers, (2) provides immunity to state or local law enforcement agencies from certain money damages, and (3) requires states to participate in programs to expedite the removal of individuals subject to removal who are serving criminal sentences.
The bill also establishes a grant program, provides for the development of state and local law enforcement training materials, and requires state and local governments to provide information about certain detained individuals.
People & committees
Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48] · R–CA
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.
Source last updated: Dec 19, 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.1927 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.1927 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.1927 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.1927 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 · 2025-03-06 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 proposal would expand state and local participation in federal immigration enforcement, require information sharing, and provide financial assistance to participating agencies. It would require 20 additional detention facilities and establish procedures for transferring certain noncitizens to federal custody. It would also protect officers and agencies from some liability, including certain civil rights damages claims. The proposal would affect noncitizens encountered by police, law enforcement agencies, and governments receiving immigration-related funding.
have the inherent authority of a sovereign entity to investigate, identify, apprehend, arrest, detain, or transfer to Federal custody aliens in the United States
each State, and each political subdivision of a State, shall submit to the Secretary, in a timely manner, the information specified in subsection (b)
The Secretary shall award grants to States and political subdivisions of States
The Secretary shall construct or acquire, in addition to existing facilities for the detention of aliens, 20 detention facilities in the United States
shall request that the relevant State or local law enforcement agency temporarily incarcerate or transport the alien for transfer to Federal custody.
shall be immune, to the same extent as a Federal law enforcement officer, from personal liability arising out of the performance of any duty described in this Act.
A State or local law enforcement agency shall be immune from any claim for money damages based on Federal, State, or local civil rights law
Section 3 would declare that state and local officers have inherent authority to investigate, identify, apprehend, arrest, detain, and transfer noncitizens while assisting federal immigration enforcement during routine duties, including transportation across state lines. The statement that Congress has never displaced this authority is the bill's assertion.
Reaffirming the existing inherent authority of States, law enforcement personnel of a State, or of a political subdivision of a State, have the inherent authority of a sovereign entity to investigate, identify, apprehend, arrest, detain, or transfer to Federal custody aliens in the United States (including the transportation of such aliens across State lines to detention centers), for the purposes of assisting in the enforcement of the immigration laws of the United States in the course of carrying out routine duties. This State authority has never been displaced or preempted by Congress.
Starting one year after enactment, a state or local government that prohibits officers from assisting or cooperating with federal immigration enforcement during routine duties would lose funds covered by the cited immigration-law provision. Withheld funds would go to governments that comply. This section would not require officers to report or arrest crime victims or witnesses.
Beginning on the date that is 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, a State, or a political subdivision of a State, that has in effect a statute, policy, or practice that prohibits law enforcement officers of the State, or of a political subdivision of the State, from assisting or cooperating with Federal immigration law enforcement in the course of carrying out the officers’ routine law enforcement duties may not receive any of the funds that would otherwise be allocated to the State under section 241(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(i)).
Nothing in this section may be construed to require law enforcement officials from States, or from political subdivisions of States, to report or arrest victims or witnesses of a criminal offense.
Any funds that are not allocated to a State, or to a political subdivision of a State, due to the failure of such State, or of the political subdivision of such State, to comply with subsection (a) shall be reallocated to States, or to political subdivisions of States, that comply with such subsection.
Within 180 days after enactment, and as updates require afterward, the Customs and Border Protection commissioner would have to send available information to the National Crime Information Center, a Justice Department database. Covered people would include those with final removal orders, signed agreements to leave voluntarily, overstayed permission to remain, or revoked visas.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and periodically thereafter as updates may require, the Commissioner for U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall provide the National Crime Information Center of the Department of Justice with such information as the Commissioner may possess regarding any aliens— (A) against whom a final order of removal has been issued; (B) who have signed a voluntary departure agreement; (C) who have overstayed their authorized period of stay; or (D) whose visas have been revoked.
The database would have to enter all supplied information in its Immigration Violators File even if the person had not received notice of a final removal order, had already been removed, or lacked sufficient identifying information.
The National Crime Information Center shall enter all of the information received pursuant to paragraph (1) into the Immigration Violators File regardless of whether— (A) the alien concerned received notice of a final order of removal; (B) the alien concerned has already been removed; or (C) sufficient identifying information is available with respect to the alien concerned.
A related amendment would add language requiring acquisition, collection, classification, and preservation of immigration-violation records, regardless of notice, sufficient identifying information, or prior removal. The Attorney General would have to implement that amendment within six months after enactment.
acquire, collect, classify, and preserve records of violations by aliens of the immigration laws of the United States, regardless of whether— (A) any such alien has received notice of any such violation; (B) sufficient identifying information is available with respect to any such alien; and (C) any such alien has already been removed from the United States;
The Attorney General shall implement the amendment made by paragraph (1) not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act.
State and local governments would have to report, in a timely manner, apprehended noncitizens believed to be violating immigration law to the Secretary of Homeland Security. Reports would include identity, residence, physical description, and encounter details; applicable identification and vehicle details; and photographs and fingerprints if available or readily obtainable. The section would not require reporting information about crime victims or witnesses.
The term Secretary means the Secretary of Homeland Security.
each State, and each political subdivision of a State, shall submit to the Secretary, in a timely manner, the information specified in subsection (b) with respect to each alien apprehended in the jurisdiction of the State, or of a political subdivision of the State, who is believed to be in violation of the immigration laws of the United States.
(1) the alien’s name; (2) the alien’s address or place of residence; (3) a physical description of the alien; (4) the date, time, and location of the encounter with the alien and reason for stopping, detaining, apprehending, or arresting the alien; (5) if applicable— (A) the alien’s driver’s license number and the State of issuance of such license; (B) the type of any other identification document issued to the alien, the designation number contained on the identification document, and the issuing entity for the identification document; and (C) the license plate number, make, and model of any automobile registered to, or driven by, the alien; and (6) if available or readily obtainable— (A) a photo of the alien; and (B) the alien’s fingerprints.
Nothing in this section may be construed to require law enforcement officials of a State, or of a political subdivision of a State, to submit to the Secretary information related to a victim of a crime or witness to a criminal offense.
Homeland Security would have to reimburse all reasonable reporting costs, as determined by the Secretary, and annually tell Congress which state and local governments provided information during the preceding year.
The Secretary shall annually submit to Congress a detailed report listing the States, and the political subdivisions of States, that provided information pursuant to subsection (a) with respect to the preceding year.
The Secretary shall reimburse States, and political subdivisions of a State, for all reasonable costs, as determined by the Secretary, incurred by each State, and each political subdivision of a State, as a result of submitting the information required to be submitted pursuant to subsection (a).
Homeland Security would award state and local grants for equipment, technology, facilities, other products, and added administrative costs directly related to the specified immigration-enforcement work.
The Secretary shall award grants to States and political subdivisions of States for the procurement of equipment, technology, facilities, and other products that facilitate and are directly related to investigating, apprehending, arresting, detaining, or transporting aliens who have violated the immigration laws of the United States, including additional administrative costs incurred to comply with the requirements under this Act.
Grant applicants would need authority, a written policy, and a practice of assisting immigration enforcement during routine duties. They could not have a policy or practice preventing local officers from asking about a suspect's immigration status. The Comptroller General would audit grant funds within three years after enactment.
A State or political subdivision of a State desiring a grant under this section shall have the authority to assist, and shall have a written policy and practice of assisting, in the enforcement of the immigration laws of the United States in the course of carrying out the routine law enforcement duties of such State or political subdivision. Entities covered under this section may not have any policy or practice that prevents local law enforcement from inquiring about a suspect's immigration status.
Not later than 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct an audit of funds distributed to States and political subdivisions of a State pursuant to subsection (a).
Homeland Security would have to build or acquire 20 additional detention facilities for people awaiting removal or a removal decision. Each would need sufficient beds for the bill's purposes, without a specified numerical bed requirement. The named federal custody-management official would choose locations.
The Secretary shall construct or acquire, in addition to existing facilities for the detention of aliens, 20 detention facilities in the United States, for aliens detained pending removal from the United States or a decision regarding such removal. Each facility shall have a sufficient number of beds necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Act.
The location of any detention facility built or acquired pursuant to this subsection shall be determined by the Assistant Director of the Custody Management Division of the Enforcement and Removal Directorate.
Section 8 would replace “may expend” with “shall expend” in the cited detention-spending provision and replace the named Immigration and Naturalization Service Salaries and Expenses account with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Operations and Support account. The full underlying provision is absent, so the scope of the resulting spending requirement cannot be determined from the supplied text alone.
Section 241(g)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(g)(1)) is amended by striking may expend from the appropriation Immigration and Naturalization Service—Salaries and Expenses, and inserting shall expend from the appropriation U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement—Operations and Support,.
For the proposed custody rules, the bill would define unlawful presence to cover entry without inspection or at an unauthorized time, manner, or place; failure to maintain or comply with nonimmigrant status when taken into state or local custody; failure to meet requirements of immigrant status; or failure to leave under a voluntary-departure agreement or final removal order.
the term alien who is unlawfully present in the United States means an alien who— (1) entered the United States without inspection or at any time, manner, or place not designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security; (2) was admitted as a nonimmigrant and who, at the time the alien was taken into custody by the State, or a political subdivision of the State, failed— (A) to maintain the nonimmigrant status in which the alien was admitted or to which it was changed pursuant to section 248; or (B) to comply with the conditions of any such status; (3) was admitted as an immigrant and subsequently failed to comply with the requirements of such status; or (4) failed to depart the United States under a voluntary departure agreement or under a final order of removal.
When a state or local government requests federal custody of an apprehended or arrested person covered by that definition, Homeland Security would have two options: take custody and incarcerate the person within 48 hours after the charging or dismissal process ends—or after apprehension if neither process is required—or request temporary state or local incarceration or transportation for transfer. The second option has no express 48-hour deadline in this language.
If a State, or a political subdivision of the State, exercising authority with respect to the apprehension or arrest of an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, submits to the Secretary of Homeland Security a request that such alien be taken into Federal custody, the Secretary— (1) not later than 48 hours after the conclusion of the State, or the political subdivision of a State, charging process or dismissal process, or if no State or political subdivision charging or dismissal process is required, not later than 48 hours after the alien is apprehended, shall take the alien into the custody of the Federal Government and incarcerate the alien; or (2) shall request that the relevant State or local law enforcement agency temporarily incarcerate or transport the alien for transfer to Federal custody.
The Attorney General or Homeland Security Secretary would have to ensure that people arrested under the bill are detained in a state or local prison, jail, detention center, or comparable facility pending examination under the new section. Facility adequacy would depend on suitable location, an appropriate use arrangement, and compliance with housing, care, and security standards for people in a United States marshal's custody.
the Attorney General or the Secretary of Homeland Security shall ensure that an alien arrested pursuant to this Act is detained, pending the alien being taken for an examination under this section, in a State or local prison, jail, detention center, or other comparable facility. Such a facility is adequate for detention if— (1) the facility is the most suitably located Federal, State, or local facility available for such purpose under the circumstances; (2) an appropriate arrangement for such use of the facility can be made; and (3) the facility satisfies the standards for the housing, care, and security of persons held in custody of a United States marshal.
Homeland Security would reimburse state and local governments for reasonable incarceration and transportation expenses, as determined by the Secretary, for people covered by the proposed unlawful-presence definition. The calculation would combine the state's average prisoner-incarceration cost for the detention period, determined by the state or local chief executive, with transportation costs. The Comptroller General would audit incarceration compensation within three years after enactment.
The Secretary of Homeland Security shall reimburse States and political subdivisions of a State for all reasonable expenses, as determined by the Secretary, incurred by the State, or political subdivision as a result of the incarceration and transportation of an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States.
Compensation provided pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be equal to the sum of— (A) the average cost of incarceration of a prisoner in the relevant State for the period the alien was incarcerated, as determined by the chief executive officer of a State, or of a political subdivision of a State; and (B) the cost of transporting the alien from the point of apprehension to the place of detention, and to the custody transfer point if the place of detention and the place of custody are different.
Not later than 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct an audit of compensation to States and political subdivisions of a State for the incarceration of aliens unlawfully present in the United States under section 240D of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as added by subsection (a)(1).
Homeland Security would have to provide appropriate security for people incarcerated in federal facilities under the new custody section and establish a regular route and schedule for prompt transfers from state and local custody. It could use contracts, including private contracts, for those transfers.
The Secretary of Homeland Security shall ensure that aliens incarcerated in Federal facilities pursuant to this section are held in facilities that provide an appropriate level of security.
the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish a regular circuit and schedule for the prompt transfer of apprehended aliens from the custody of States and political subdivisions of a State to Federal custody.
The Secretary of Homeland Security may enter into contracts, including appropriate private contracts, to implement this subsection.
Within 180 days after enactment, Homeland Security would develop a training manual and pocket guide covering immigration enforcement, including interstate transportation and fraudulent-document identification. It would pay development costs and make both available to all state and local law enforcement personnel. This section would not require personnel to carry them on duty.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall develop— (1) a manual to train law enforcement personnel of a State, or of a political subdivision of a State, on the investigation, identification, apprehension, arrest, detention, and transfer to Federal custody of aliens unlawfully present in the United States (including the transportation of such aliens across State lines to detention centers and the identification of fraudulent documents); and (2) an immigration enforcement pocket guide for law enforcement personnel of a State, or of a political subdivision of a State, to provide a quick reference for such personnel in the course of carrying out their duties.
The training manual and pocket guide developed pursuant to subsection (a) shall be made available to all State and local law enforcement personnel.
The Secretary shall be responsible for any costs incurred in developing the training manual and pocket guide pursuant to subsection (a).
Nothing in this section may be construed to require State or local law enforcement personnel to carry the training manual or pocket guide with them while on duty.
Training would have to be offered through as many methods as possible, including residential, local, online, teleconference, and recorded courses. Within 120 days after enactment, Homeland Security would have to provide a secure, encrypted online training portal through the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center's Distributed Learning Program, with capacity to expand and survive disruptions and with all servers in the United States.
The Secretary shall make training of State and local law enforcement officers available through as many means as possible, including through— (A) residential training at the Center for Domestic Preparedness of the Federal Emergency Management Agency; (B) onsite training held at State or local police agencies or facilities; (C) online training courses by computer, teleconferencing, and videotape; or (D) training courses made available on DVD.
Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall ensure that— (A) an e-learning portal is made available through the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center's Distributed Learning Program to train State and local law enforcement officers through a secure, encrypted distributed learning system; and (B) the system described in subparagraph (A) is scalable and survivable and has all its servers based in the United States.
Existing web-based immigration-enforcement training systems would receive funding priority. State and local training could not displace federal personnel training.
In carrying out this section, priority funding shall be given for existing web-based immigration enforcement training systems.
The training of State and local law enforcement personnel under this section shall not displace the training of Federal personnel.
The bill would bar interpreting this Act or any other law as requiring immigration-related training before state or local officers assist federal immigration enforcement during their normal duties.
Nothing in this Act or in any other provision of law may be construed as making any immigration-related training a requirement for, or prerequisite to, any State or local law enforcement officer assisting in the enforcement of Federal immigration laws in the normal course of carrying out the law enforcement duties of such officers.
State and local officers acting within their official duties would receive protection from personal liability for duties described in the bill to the same extent as federal law enforcement officers. The supplied text does not establish the precise extent of that federal immunity benchmark.
A law enforcement officer of a State or local law enforcement agency who is acting within the scope of the officer’s official duties shall be immune, to the same extent as a Federal law enforcement officer, from personal liability arising out of the performance of any duty described in this Act.
State and local law enforcement agencies would be protected against civil rights claims seeking money damages for incidents arising from federal immigration enforcement. The exception would apply to the extent an agency officer violated federal, state, or local criminal law while enforcing immigration law.
A State or local law enforcement agency shall be immune from any claim for money damages based on Federal, State, or local civil rights law for an incident arising out of the enforcement of any Federal immigration law, except to the extent a law enforcement officer of such agency committed a violation of Federal, State, or local criminal law in the course of enforcing such immigration law.
Homeland Security would have to continue the Institutional Removal Program and extend it to every state. The bill describes its functions as identifying removable noncitizens it calls “criminal aliens” in federal and state correctional facilities, preventing their release into the community, and removing them after their sentences. The bill does not define “criminal aliens,” so the supplied text does not establish a precise conviction-based scope.
The Secretary shall continue to operate and implement the program known as the Institutional Removal Program, which— (A) identifies removable criminal aliens in Federal and State correctional facilities; (B) ensures such aliens are not released into the community; and (C) removes such aliens from the United States after the completion of their respective sentences.
The Institutional Removal Program shall be extended to all States.
States receiving federal funds for incarcerating people the bill calls “criminal aliens” would have to cooperate with the Institutional Removal Program, systematically and quickly identify all such people in prisons and jails, and promptly provide that information to program officials as a funding condition.
Any State that receives Federal funds for the incarceration of criminal aliens shall— (A) cooperate with officials of the Institutional Removal Program; (B) expeditiously and systematically identify all criminal aliens in its prison and jail populations; and (C) promptly convey such information to officials of the Institutional Removal Program as a condition of receiving such Federal funds.
State and local officers could hold a person the bill calls a “criminal alien” for up to 14 days after a state prison sentence ends to arrange federal transfer, if the person is removable or unlawfully present. Alternatively, officers could issue a detainer allowing a noncitizen who has served a state prison sentence to remain detained by the state prison until Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel can take custody. That alternative does not state a 14-day cap.
Law enforcement officers of a State, or of a political subdivision of a State, may— (1) hold a criminal alien for a period of up to 14 days after the alien has completed the alien’s State prison sentence in order to effectuate the transfer of the alien to Federal custody when the alien is removable or not lawfully present in the United States; or (2) issue a detainer that would allow aliens who have served a State prison sentence to be detained by the State prison until personnel from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement can take such alien into custody.
The program would have to use technology such as video conferencing as much as practicable to reach remote locations. Mobile access to federal noncitizen databases and live-scan technology would likewise have to be used as much as practicable to make those resources available to state and local law enforcement agencies in remote locations.
Technology, such as video conferencing, shall be used to the maximum extent practicable to make the Institutional Removal Program available in remote locations. Mobile access to Federal databases of aliens, such as IDENT, and live scan technology shall be used, to the maximum extent practicable, to make such resources available to State and local law enforcement agencies in remote locations.
Section 13 would authorize appropriations of whatever sums are necessary for Homeland Security to carry out the bill, beginning in fiscal year 2025 and continuing each subsequent fiscal year. It would also replace the cited State Criminal Alien Assistance Program authorization with an authorization of necessary sums for the same years. These are authorizations for appropriations, not specified dollar appropriations, and they state no ending fiscal year. The full underlying assistance-program law is not supplied.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Homeland Security, for fiscal year 2025, and for each subsequent fiscal year, such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act.
(b) State Criminal Alien Assistance Program Section 241(i)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(i)(5)) is amended to read as follows: (5) Authorization of appropriations There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2025 and for each subsequent fiscal year.
If a provision or its application were held invalid, the bill's severability clause would preserve the remaining provisions and their application to other circumstances or people who are not similarly situated.
If any provision of this Act or of any amendment made by this Act, or the application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of the provisions of this Act and of the amendments made by this Act, and the application of any such provision or amendment to other persons not similarly situated or to other circumstances, shall not be affected.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated December 19, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Judiciary Committee on March 6, 2025. It does not establish what happened afterward.
Source snapshot updated 2025-12-19T21:58:47Z. 2025-03-06: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-03-06: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-06. 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 rider attached to appropriations was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to that version and does not establish the absence of riders in other versions or accompanying materials, or any amendment's attachment history.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No earmark was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This text-only conclusion does not establish formal earmark status or the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The findings identify special legal protections and a funding preference related to the bill's main policy. Classification does not establish that these benefits are unjustified.
State and local law enforcement agencies would receive a subject-specific exemption from civil rights claims for money damages arising from federal immigration enforcement, except to the extent an agency officer violated criminal law while enforcing it. This benefits those agencies by limiting a category of claims against them.
A State or local law enforcement agency shall be immune from any claim for money damages based on Federal, State, or local civil rights law for an incident arising out of the enforcement of any Federal immigration law, except to the extent a law enforcement officer of such agency committed a violation of Federal, State, or local criminal law in the course of enforcing such immigration law.
State and local law enforcement officers acting within their official duties would receive personal-liability protection for work described in the bill, measured by the protection available to federal law enforcement officers. This is a duty-specific legal protection tied to their participation in the bill's enforcement policy; its precise extent depends on federal immunity rules not reproduced in the bundle.
A law enforcement officer of a State or local law enforcement agency who is acting within the scope of the officer’s official duties shall be immune, to the same extent as a Federal law enforcement officer, from personal liability arising out of the performance of any duty described in this Act.
Existing web-based immigration-enforcement training systems would receive priority funding within the bill's training program. This expressly favors an existing class of systems in implementing the main enforcement policy; the provision does not identify particular providers or recipients.
In carrying out this section, priority funding shall be given for existing web-based immigration enforcement training systems.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Dec 19, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI