PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 28, 2021
Safeguarding United States Research Act
This bill imposes certain reporting requirements on the sponsor of an F, M, or J (student or exchange visitor) visa and authorizes the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to revoke such a visa in certain instances. It also expands disclosure requirements for applicants of federal research and development awards.
The Department of State must require a sponsor of a J visa to report any change to the visa holder's primary field of study. The State Department and DHS shall require a sponsor of an F, M, or J visa to report when the visa holder is participating in a federally funded research program.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
DHS may review and revoke an F, M, or J visa in certain instances, such as finding that (1) the visa holder misrepresented an intention to pursue a field of study, or (2) the visa holder's participation in a federally funded research program poses a national security risk. The bill also imposes certain limits on the ability to appeal such a revocation decision.
The bill also requires applications for federal research and development awards to disclose any in-kind contributions received by the applicant. Furthermore, if an applicant works for an institution that is required to file disclosures relating to the receipt of foreign gifts, the application for the federal award must include a certification that the applicant has provided the employing institution all the information necessary to comply with that disclosure requirement.
People & committees
Rep. Norman, Ralph [R-SC-5] · R–SC
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 Immigration and Citizenship.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Research and Technology.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, 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 Science, Space, and Technology, 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.
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.3619 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.3619 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.3619 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.3619 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.