PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 3, 2025
U.S. Customs and Border Protection Relocation Act or the CBP Relocation Act
This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to relocate the headquarters of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (including the functions, personnel, and real assets of the headquarters) to Texas no later than January 1, 2026.
People & committees
Rep. Self, Keith [R-TX-3] · 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 Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
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: Feb 24, 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.195 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.195 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.195 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.195 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 · 2025-01-03 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 U.S. Customs and Border Protection to move its headquarters to Texas by January 1, 2026. The move would include headquarters functions, staff, and real assets, such as land and buildings. The headquarters would have to be located strategically for handling a crisis at the U.S.–Mexico border. These are proposed requirements.
Not later than January 1, 2026, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall relocate to the State of Texas the headquarters of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, including the functions, personnel, and real assets of such headquarters.
The relocation described in subsection (a) shall be strategically placed with respect to handling a crisis at the border between the United States and Mexico.
The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Customs and Border Protection Commissioner, would be responsible for completing the headquarters relocation by January 1, 2026.
Not later than January 1, 2026, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall relocate to the State of Texas the headquarters of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, including the functions, personnel, and real assets of such headquarters.
Federal officials would have to collaborate with the Texas General Land Office Commissioner to ensure that the headquarters location is strategically suited to handling a U.S.–Mexico border crisis.
the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection— (1) shall collaborate with the Commissioner of the General Land Office of the State of Texas to ensure that the requirement described in subsection (c) is satisfied;
(c) Headquarters requirement The relocation described in subsection (a) shall be strategically placed with respect to handling a crisis at the border between the United States and Mexico.
The Secretary would be allowed to acquire ownership or other rights in Texas land for the relocation. Any such acquisition would require a written contract signed by the Secretary and the person authorized to transfer those rights.
(2) may acquire any right, title, or interest in or to land in the State of Texas through a written contract that is signed by the Secretary and the individual who is authorized to convey such right, title, or interest, as the case may be.
Ownership title to land transferred to the Secretary for the relocation would have to meet the Attorney General’s title approval standards for federal land acquisitions.
Any title to land conveyed to the Secretary of Homeland Security in carrying out the relocation described in subsection (a) shall conform to the title approval standards of the Attorney General that are applicable to land acquisitions by the Federal Government.
The supplied action snapshot, updated February 24, 2025, records introduction in the House and referrals to the House Committee on Homeland Security and its Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability on January 3, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-02-24T20:44:30Z. 2025-01-03: Referred to the Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability. 2025-01-03: Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security. 2025-01-03: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-01-03. 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 was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to that version and does not establish attachment history or the contents of other versions.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending allocation was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; accompanying earmark disclosures and committee materials were not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The text contains a specific geographic preference within its central relocation policy. This classification does not establish an economic benefit or improper purpose.
Texas receives the geographic preference: the bill requires the headquarters, its functions, personnel, and real assets to be relocated to that state.
shall relocate to the State of Texas the headquarters of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, including the functions, personnel, and real assets of such headquarters.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Feb 24, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI