PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 171.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Oct 18, 2011
Keep Our Communities Safe Act of 2011 - Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to revise provisions regarding the detention and removal of aliens ordered removed.
Begins the removal period on the latest of: (1) the date the removal order becomes administratively final; (2) the date the alien is taken into Department of Homeland Security (DHS) custody if the alien is not in DHS custody on the date the removal order becomes administratively final; or (3) if the alien is detained or confined (except under an immigration process) on the date the removal order becomes administratively final, the date the alien is taken into DHS custody after the alien is released from detention or confinement.
Extends the removal (and detention) period beyond 90 days if: (1) the alien fails or refuses to comply with the removal order or to fully cooperate with DHS efforts to establish the alien's identity and carry out the removal order; (2) a court, the Board of Immigration Appeals, or an immigration judge orders a stay of removal of an alien who is subject to a final removal order; or (3) DHS transfers custody of the alien to another federal agency or to a state or local agency.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Begins a new removal period in the case of such an extended removal on the date: (1) the alien makes all reasonable efforts to comply with the removal order or to fully cooperate with DHS efforts to establish the alien's identity and carry out the removal order, (2) the stay of removal is no longer in effect, or (3) the alien is returned to DHS custody.
Authorizes DHS to detain indefinitely, subject to six-month review, an alien under removal order who cannot be removed if: (1) the alien will be removed in the reasonably foreseeable future; (2) the alien would have been removed but for the alien's refusal to cooperate with DHS identification and removal efforts; (3) the alien has a highly contagious disease that poses a public safety threat; (4) release would have serious adverse foreign policy consequences or would threaten national security; (5) release would threaten the safety of the community or any person and the alien has been convicted of either one or more aggravated felonies or crimes of violence and, because of a mental or personality condition, is likely to engage in future acts of violence; or (6) release would threaten the safety of the community or any person and the alien has been convicted of one or more aggravated felonies.
Authorizes unlimited detention of certain aliens during removal proceedings.
States that habeas corpus review of such detention and related actions or decisions shall be available only in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after exhaustion of administrative remedies.
Subjects a criminal alien to mandatory DHS detention upon release without regard to whether the alien's release is related to: (1) certain activities, offenses, or convictions under INA; (2) whether the alien is released on parole, supervised release, or probation; or (3) whether the alien may be arrested or imprisoned again for the same offense.
Limits the Attorney General's (DOJ) review of DHS custody determinations to whether the alien may be detained, released with no bond, or released on bond of at least $1,500.
Limits the Attorney General's review of DHS custody determinations for an alien in certain categories to whether the alien was properly included in such category.
Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) this Act should ensure that constitutional rights are protected, and (2) it is the intention of Congress to uphold the constitutional principles of due process and that due process is a right of everyone in the United States.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Lamar [R-TX-21] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 171.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-255.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-255.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 17 - 14.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement.
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: Apr 7, 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.1932 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.1932 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.1932 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.1932 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.