PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 26, 2018
Reunite Every Unaccompanied Newborn Infant, Toddler and other children Expeditiously Act or the REUNITE Act
This bill directs the Departments of Homeland Security (DHS) and Health and Human Services (HHS), after consultation with humanitarian organizations, child welfare agencies, and states bordering Mexico, to promulgate and publish a rule describing efforts that DHS and HHS will undertake to aid apprehended parents or legal guardians in locating and reuniting with any children (under age 18 with no permanent immigration status) separated from them at or near the port of entry, or within 100 miles of the border. DHS, HHS, and the Department of Justice (DOJ) must provide apprehended parents or legal guardians separated from their children with written notice, in a language understandable to them, of any rules or guidance that may assist them in locating and reuniting with their children.
The bill permits DHS and HHS to use DNA testing to determine family relationships subject to certain requirements, after using other commonly-used techniques for determining such relationships.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
DHS must establish secure alternative programs that incorporate case management services in each DHS field office to ensure appearances by alien parents and children at immigration proceedings and public safety and to provide for community-based alternatives to detention.
DHS, DOJ, and HHS shall establish an interagency Office for Locating and Reuniting Children with Parents for facilitating the reunification of children and apprehended parents or legal guardians after entering the United States.
The bill requires DOJ to appoint counsel, free of charge, for children and vulnerable aliens (e.g., persons with disabilities and victims of abuse, torture, or violence) in immigration proceedings.
The bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to limit bonds for detained aliens to $1,500, except for aliens who have committed an aggravated felony (as defined by the INA).
People & committees
Rep. Espaillat, Adriano [D-NY-13] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.
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 11, 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.6594 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.6594 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.6594 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.6594 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.