PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 15, 2007
Citizenship and Immigration Backlog Reduction Act - Directs the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to jointly provide to the appropriate congressional committees a plan for ensuring that within 18 months of the date of enactment of this Act the National Name Check Program will no longer have any requested name checks from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) in backlog status (as defined by this Act).
States that beginning 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act the Program is not authorized to have any file in backlog status.
Provides that after such date any name check request from USCIS held by the Program for longer than six months shall: (1) be referred to the Secretary who shall adjudicate interim benefits (unless there is reasonable cause to suspect that the applicant poses a threat to national security, otherwise poses a threat to the United States, or has broken U.S. immigration law); and (2) have the name check fee refunded.
People & committees
Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-11] · D–NY
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, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.3828 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.3828 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.3828 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.3828 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.