PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Jan 30, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here
Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2011 - Amends the federal criminal code to: (1) subject anyone who attempts or conspires to construct or finance construction of an unauthorized tunnel or subterranean passage that crosses the international border between the United States and another country, to use such a tunnel for smuggling, or to disregard such construction or use, to the penalties prescribed for someone who commits such an offense; (2) make such a border tunnel offense a predicate offense for a money laundering violation and for authorization for interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications; and (3) provide for the criminal forfeiture of proceeds of such an offense and the seizure and forfeiture of merchandise introduced into the United States through such a tunnel.
Encourages the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) to annually provide each known nongovernmental owner and tenant of land located in a national security zone with a written notification that describes federal laws related to the construction of illegal border tunnels and the procedures for reporting violations of such laws to United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Defines: (1) "national security zone" as any Southwest Border land designated by the Secretary as being at a high risk for border tunnel activity; and (2) "Southwest Border land" as all parcels of real property in the United States that are located within one mile of the U.S.-Mexico international border and that are not owned by a federal, state, tribal, or local government entity.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary to submit an annual report describing: (1) cross border tunnels discovered in Southwest Border land; and (2) DHS needs to effectively prevent, investigate, and prosecute border tunnel construction on such land.
People & committees
Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S172-173; text: CR S172-173)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S172-173; text: CR S172-173)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 260.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3932-3933)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3931-3932)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.1236 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.1236 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.1236 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.1236 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.