PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 628.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 19, 2025
Northern Border Security Enhancement and Review Act
This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to regularly perform a threat analysis of the northern U.S. border.
The analysis must be performed every two years and include terroristic and criminal threats, improvements needed to prevent terrorism and reduce criminal activity, and whether preclearance and advance inspection operations at northern ports of entry could prevent terrorists from entering in the United States.
DHS must (1) update its northern border strategy after performing each threat analysis, and (2) provide a classified briefing to Congress. If DHS determines no update is required, DHS must notify Congress.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Air and Marine Operations (AMO) must develop performance measures to assess the AMO’s effectiveness at securing the northern border between ports of entry in air and maritime environments.
People & committees
Rep. Langworthy, Nicholas A. [R-NY-23] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 628.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5898)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5517.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5898-5899)
Mr. Van Epps moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 728.
Reported by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 119-830.
Reported by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 119-830.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 28 - 2.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement Discharged
Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
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: Oct 1, 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.5517 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.5517 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.5517 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.5517 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.