PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 14, 2017
Criminal Alien Gang Member Removal Act
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to make an alien: (1) inadmissible if a consular officer, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), or the Department of Justice (DOJ) knows or has reason to believe that such person is or has been a member of a criminal gang or has participated in criminal gang activities; and (2) deportable if such person is or has been a member of a criminal gang, or has participated in criminal gang activities knowing that such activities will promote illegal activity.
A "criminal gang" is defined as an ongoing group, club, organization, or association of five or more persons: (1) one of the primary purposes of which is the commission of specified criminal offenses and the members of which engage, or have engaged within the past five years, in a continuing series of such offenses; or (2) that has been designated as a criminal gang by DHS. Such offenses include: (1) felony drug offenses, (2) bringing in and harboring certain aliens, (3) assisting certain aliens to enter the United States, (4) importing aliens for immoral purposes, (5) crimes of violence, (6) obstruction of justice or witness tampering, (7) identification document fraud, (8) slavery and trafficking in persons, (9) money laundering, and (10) interstate or foreign travel in connection with a racketeering enterprise.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
DHS: (1) may designate a group of five or more persons as a criminal gang based upon its conduct, and (2) shall publish a designation in the Federal Register seven days after providing congressional notification as provided for in this bill. A designation shall be effective until: (1) it is revoked or blocked by Congress; (2) DHS determines that the group no longer fits such designation or that national security or law enforcement interests warrant a revocation; or (3) it is judicially set aside. A group may file a petition for revocation with DHS. The bill prescribes DHS review provisions. A revocation of a designation shall not affect any proceeding based on conduct committed prior to the effective date of the revocation.
Within 30 days after publication of a designation, an amended designation, or a determination in response to a petition for revocation, a designated group may seek judicial review with the U.S. Court of Appeals, DC Circuit.
The bill: (1) provides for mandatory detention of alien gang members; and (2) makes alien gang members ineligible for asylum, temporary protected status, special immigrant juvenile status, and parole (unless such an alien is assisting the United States in a law enforcement matter).
People & committees
Rep. Comstock, Barbara [R-VA-10] · 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 and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 233 - 175 (Roll no. 517). (text: CR H7387-7389)
House roll call 517 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 233 - 175 (Roll no. 517).(text: CR H7387-7389)
House roll call 517 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 184 - 220 (Roll no. 516).
House roll call 516 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
Floor summary: DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Beyer 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 to add at the end of the bill a section pertaining to Protecting Innocent Religious Workers from Deportation.
Mr. Beyer moved to recommit with instructions to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text: CR H7399)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 3697.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3697 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.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 513. (consideration: CR H7387-7401)
Rule H. Res. 513 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 513 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3697 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.
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: Aug 10, 2026. 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.3697 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.3697 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.3697 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.3697 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.