PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 26, 2016
Fair Day in Court for Kids Act of 2016
This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) authorize the Department of Justice (DOJ) to appoint or provide counsel at government expense to aliens in removal proceedings.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) shall provide an alien in removal proceedings with all relevant documents in its possession, unless the alien has knowingly waived the right to such documents. In the absence of a waiver a removal proceeding may not proceed until the alien has received, and had time to review, the documents.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
DOJ may appoint or provide counsel to aliens in any INA proceeding.
DHS shall ensure that aliens have access to counsel inside all immigration detention and border facilities.
DOJ shall appoint counsel, at government expense if necessary, for an unaccompanied alien child or a particularly vulnerable individual. If DOJ has consolidated any such alien's case with that of any other alien, and that other alien does not have counsel, then the appointed counsel shall be appointed to represent the other alien as well.
DHS shall: (1) facilitate access to counsel for all aliens detained in facilities under the supervision of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement or of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP); and (2) establish procedures to ensure that legal orientation programs are available for all detained aliens, including aliens held in CBP facilities.
DOJ shall develop and administer a two-year pilot program at not fewer than two immigration courts to grant access to legal information to non-detained aliens with pending asylum claims.
DHS shall establish a pilot program to increase the court appearance rates of unaccompanied alien children and particularly vulnerable individuals by contracting with nongovernmental, community-based organizations to provide such aliens with case management services. The pilot program shall not be used to monitor individuals designated as unaccompanied alien children under the Homeland Security Act.
If DOJ fails to appoint counsel for an unaccompanied alien child or vulnerable person: (1) no limitation pertaining to the filing of any motion to reopen the removal proceeding shall apply, and (2) the filing of such a motion shall stay the removal of the alien.
People & committees
Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-19] · D–CA
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 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 12, 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.4646 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.4646 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.4646 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.4646 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.