PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 27, 2023
Safe Zones Act of 2023
This bill makes changes to procedures relating to seeking asylum, including by establishing facilities outside of the United States to accept and process refugee applications to the United States.
Specifically, the Department of State must establish safe zones that accept applications for asylum from individuals who are nationals of (1) the country where that safe zone is located, or (2) a country next to the country where the safe zone is located. The State Department must establish at least three safe zones along the U.S.-Mexico border and one safe zone in Guatemala.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
For each safe zone, the State Department must (1) ensure that it is fortified from danger; (2) provide temporary housing for individuals with pending applications; (3) provide adequate meals; and (4) provide access to various services, including medical services. The bill also imposes various requirements related to safe zones, including deadlines for processing applications.
The bill expands the definition of asylum officer (i.e., officers who conduct initial credible fear reviews to determine whether an asylum seeker's application may proceed) to include trained and qualified staff as determined by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). (In 2020, a federal court ruled that DHS may not use U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents to conduct such interviews.)
The bill also requires the hiring of additional border patrol agents and immigration judges.
People & committees
Rep. Gonzalez, Vicente [D-TX-34] · D–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 Border Security and Enforcement.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jul 24, 2024. 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.2946 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.2946 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.2946 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.2946 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.