PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 3, 2025
Ensuring United Families at the Border Act
This bill addresses the treatment of children who are non-U.S. nationals (aliens under federal law), including by statutorily establishing that there is no presumption that such a child (other than an unaccompanied child) should not be detained for immigration purposes.
Specifically, the bill states that the detention of such minors shall be governed by specified sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act and not any other provision of law, judicial ruling, or settlement agreement.
(A 1997 settlement agreement, commonly known as the Flores agreement, imposes requirements relating to the treatment of detained alien minors, including requiring such minors to be released or placed in a nonsecure facility after a certain amount of time in detention.)
If an adult enters the United States unlawfully with their child, the Department of Homeland Security must detain the adult and child together if the only criminal charge against the adult is a misdemeanor for unlawful entry.
This bill also prohibits states from imposing licensing requirements on immigration detention facilities used to detain minors or families with minors.
People & committees
Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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: Oct 2, 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.61 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.61 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.61 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.61 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.