PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 30, 2023
No Relief for Allies of Dictators Act of 2023
This bill requires the Department of State to deny or revoke visas for certain individuals associated with the Hugo Chavez or Nicolas Maduro regimes of Venezuela, the Fidel or Raul Castro regime of Cuba, the Daniel Ortega regime or Sandinista party of Nicaragua, or the Evo Morales regime of Bolivia.
Specifically, the State Department must deny or revoke the visas of certain foreign persons associated with these regimes (for example, current and former officials) if they (1) have participated in human rights violations or activities to undermine democracy in one of these four countries, or (2) are described in certain laws or executive orders related to activities such as narcotics trafficking and corrupt practices. The spouse and children of such an individual are also subject to visa denial and revocation under this bill.
People & committees
Sen. Scott, Rick [R-FL] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
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: Aug 10, 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 S.1129 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 S.1129 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 S.1129 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 S.1129 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.