PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Apr 15, 2008
Religious Worker Visa Extension Act of 2008 - Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue final regulations to eliminate or reduce fraud in the special immigrant non-minister religious worker program by December 31, 2008.
Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to: (1) extend the special immigrant program for non-minister religious workers until January 1, 2010; and (2) extend the program until January 1, 2016, (to be effective March 1, 2009) if the Secretary issues such final regulations by December 31, 2008.
Directs the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security to report to Congress on such regulations' effectiveness by September 30, 2010. Requires that such report shall include an analysis of a random sample of non-minister special immigrant religious workers, before their second anniversary of being admitted, to determine whether they are still employed by the religious organization that petitioned for them, and if not, the reasons for their departure from such employment.
People & committees
Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-16] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Received in the Senate.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
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. (consideration: CR H2284-2285)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(consideration: CR H2284-2285)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5570.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2284-2289)
Mr. Conyers moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 364.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 110-589.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 110-589.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by the Yeas and Nays: 8 - 1 .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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.5570 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.5570 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.5570 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.5570 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.