PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jul 10, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security, within 90 days of enactment of this Act, to transfer to United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement all functions (including personnel, assets, and liabilities attributable to such functions) of the Customs Patrol Officers unit operating on the Tohono O'odham Indian reservation ("Shadow Wolves" unit).
Authorizes the Secretary to establish within United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement additional Customs Patrol Officer units.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
States that the transferred Customs Patrol Officer unit, and any additional units established under this Act, shall operate on Indian lands to prevent the entry into the United States of terrorists, unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband.
Provides that: (1) a Customs Patrol Officer under this Act shall receive equivalent pay as a special agent with similar competencies within United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement pursuant to the Department of Homeland Security's Human Resources Management System; and (2) each unit under this Act shall be supervised by a Chief Customs Patrol Officer who shall have the same rank as a resident agent-in-charge of the Office of Investigations within United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
People & committees
Rep. Souder, Mark E. [R-IN-3] · R–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H4928)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H4928)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5589.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4928-4930)
Mr. Souder moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity.
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: Apr 7, 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.5589 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.5589 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.5589 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.5589 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.