PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 23, 2019
Detention Oversight, Not Expansion Act or the DONE Act
This bill prohibits the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from using any federal funds to construct or expand immigration detention facilities and requires additional oversight of such facilities.
The DHS Inspector General shall conduct various oversight activities into immigration detention facilities, including (1) periodic unannounced inspections; (2) audits to ensure compliance with various legal requirements; and (3) investigations into issues such as deaths in custody, detainee access to medical and mental health care, and sexual assault and harassment. DHS may not continue a contract with any facility deemed less than adequate in two of the most recent inspector general inspections, audits, or investigations.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties within DHS shall (1) investigate civil rights and civil liberties complaints in immigration detention facilities, and (2) periodically release on a public website data about such complaints and investigations.
The bill requires various reports to Congress, including a DHS plan for decreasing the number of immigration detention beds and implementing community-based alternatives to detention.
People & committees
Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7] · D–WA
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 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: Jan 27, 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.3906 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.3906 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.3906 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.3906 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.