PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Aug 22, 2020
Emergency Stopgap USCIS Stabilization Act
This bill expands Department of Homeland Security (DHS) authority to provide premium processing services for certain immigration-related applications and contains other related provisions.
DHS may collect a fee to provide premium processing of an application for any immigration benefit that DHS considers appropriate, subject to certain requirements. Currently, DHS only has statutory authority to provide premium processing for employment-based applications.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Under current law, DHS must use such premium fees to provide premium processing services and make infrastructure improvements. Under this bill, such fees shall be used for these purposes and other activities that offset the cost of providing adjudication and naturalization services.
DHS may suspend premium processing of applications only if circumstances prevent the timely processing of a significant number of such applications. DHS shall provide those who have requested premium processing with access to case status information and communications channels to the premium processing units.
DHS may expand premium processing to certain immigrant benefits and set fees for such processing without following certain rulemaking procedures if DHS meets certain requirements, such as limiting the premium fee to specified amounts.
The bill also increases the premium fees charged to applicants. DHS may, subject to requirements, biennially adjust premium fees to reflect inflation without following certain rulemaking requirements.
People & committees
Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-19] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection. (text: CR H4299)
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H4299-4300)
Committee on the Budget discharged.
Committee on the Budget discharged.
Committee on the Judiciary discharged.
Committee on the Judiciary discharged.
Mr. Raskin asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
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.8089 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.8089 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.8089 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.8089 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.