PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jun 29, 2017
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Kate's Law
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to revise provisions relating to the reentry of removed aliens.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill provides that an alien who has been excluded, deported, removed, or denied admission, or who has departed the United States while under an outstanding order of exclusion, deportation, or removal, and who subsequently crosses or attempts to cross the border into the United States, shall be fined, imprisoned not more than two years, or both. ("Crosses the border" refers to the physical act of crossing the border, regardless of whether the alien is free from official restraint.)
The bill revises reentry of criminal offender provisions to provide that an alien who was convicted before such removal or departure of:
three or more misdemeanors or for a felony shall be fined, imprisoned up to 10 years, or both;
a felony for which the alien was sentenced to not less than 30 months in prison shall be fined, imprisoned up to 15 years, or both;
a felony for which the alien was sentenced to not less than 60 months shall be fined, imprisoned up to 20 years, or both; or
murder, rape, kidnapping, or a felony offense relating to peonage and slavery or terrorism, or of three or more felonies of any kind, shall be fined, imprisoned up to 25 years, or both.
An alien who has been excluded, deported, removed, or denied admission three or more times and thereafter enters, attempts to enter, or crosses or attempts to cross the border to, or is at any time found in, the United States shall be fined, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.
The bill states that it shall be an affirmative defense to a reentry violation (thus placing the burden of proof on the defendant) that: (1) prior to the alleged violation, the alien had received Department of Homeland Security (DHS) consent to reapply for U.S. admission; or (2) with respect to an alien previously denied admission and removed, the alien was not required to obtain such advance consent and had complied with all other applicable admissions laws and regulations.
In a criminal proceeding under this section, an alien may not challenge the validity of any prior removal order. (Currently, the validity of a prior deportation order may be challenged under certain grounds.)
A removed alien who enters, attempts to enter, or crosses or attempts to cross the border to, or is at any time found in, the United States shall be incarcerated for the remainder of the sentence that was pending at the time of deportation without any reduction for parole or supervised release unless the alien affirmatively demonstrates that DHS has consented to the alien's reentry.
People & committees
Rep. Goodlatte, Bob [R-VA-6] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 257 - 167 (Roll no. 344). (text: CR H5333)
House roll call 344 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 257 - 167 (Roll no. 344).(text: CR H5333)
House roll call 344 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 193 - 232 (Roll no. 343).
House roll call 343 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5355-5356)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Lofgren motion to recommit with instructions, Chair put the question on adoption of the motion to recommit and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Lofgren demanded the yeas and nays, and the Chair postponed further proceedings until later in the later legislative day.
The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Lofgren motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment adding a new section at the end of the bill pertaining to Protecting Victims of Trafficking.
Ms. Lofgren moved to recommit with instructions to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text: CR H5352)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 3004.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3004 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is closed to amendments. Providing for adjournment for the period of July 3, 2017 through July 10, 2017.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 415. (consideration: CR H5333-5353)
Rule H. Res. 415 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 415 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3004 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is closed to amendments. Providing for adjournment for the period of July 3, 2017 through July 10, 2017.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.3004 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.3004 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.3004 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.3004 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.