PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Message received in the Senate: Returned to the Senate pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 1653.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jul 28, 2010
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Emergency Border Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2010 - Appropriates additional FY2010 amounts to remain available until September 30, 2012, to: (1) U.S. Customs and Border Protection for salaries and expenses related to staffing on the Southwest Border of the United States, acquisition and deployment of unmanned aircraft systems, construction of up to three Border Patrol forward operating bases along the Southwest Border, and border security fencing, infrastructure, and technology along the Southwest Border; (2) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for salaries and expenses for law enforcement activities along the Southwest Border; and (3) Department of Justice (DOJ) law enforcement activities related to the Southwest Border.
Appropriates additional FY2010 amounts to remain available until September 30, 2011, for: (1) Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Operation Stonegarden (enhancement of law enforcement operational readiness along the U.S. borders); and (2) Federal Law Enforcement Training Center training for new U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers and Border Patrol agents.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Rescinds from unobligated balances certain funds for: (1) U.S. Customs and Border Protection, border security fencing, infrastructure, and technology; (2) Transportation Security Administration (TSA), aviation security; (3) FEMA, administrative and regional operations; and (4) Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, periodic censuses and programs.
Directs the Department of Defense (DOD) to pay in FY2010-FY2011 the full costs associated with deployment of the National Guard along the Southwest Border.
People & committees
Rep. Price, David E. [D-NC-4] · D–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Message received in the Senate: Returned to the Senate pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 1653.
Senate amendment and accompanying papers returned to Senate pursuant to H.Res. 1653.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
See also S. 3721.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S6838-6845)
Received in the Senate.
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 H6253)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6253)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5875.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6253-6257)
Mr. Price (NC) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to House Budget
Referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to House Appropriations
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 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.5875 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.5875 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.5875 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.5875 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.