PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security, Facilitation, and Operations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 18, 2019
Border Zone Reasonableness Restoration Act of 2019
This bill limits the ability of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to conduct searches and related activities without a warrant.
DHS may without warrant board a vehicle for border enforcement purposes within 25 miles of any U.S. border, whereas currently DHS has statutory authority to do so within a reasonable distance of a U.S. border. DHS may exercise such authority in a sector that extends up to 100 miles from a U.S. border upon certifying to Congress the necessity of such an extension.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
DHS may not establish warrantless vehicle checkpoints beyond 10 miles from a U.S. border. Such checkpoints may not use race, gender, religion, or sex to any degree, except as descriptions of a specific suspect.
DHS may without warrant access private lands, but not dwellings, for border enforcement purposes within 10 miles of any U.S. border, whereas currently DHS has statutory authority to do so within 25 miles of a U.S. border. DHS may exercise such authority in a sector that extends up to 25 miles from a U.S. border upon certifying to Congress the necessity of such an extension.
An individual harmed by an extension of a maximum distance limitation under this bill may sue in federal district court.
DHS authority to conduct various border enforcement activities without warrant must be consistent with the Fourth Amendment.
People & committees
Rep. Welch, Peter [D-VT-At Large] · D–VT
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, Facilitation, and Operations.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship.
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: Dec 5, 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.3852 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.3852 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.3852 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.3852 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.