PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S9961-9963)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 25, 2003
International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2003 - Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to prohibit U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents (LPRs) from filing more than one application for a K fiance(e) visa in any one-year period.
Amends the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, 1997 to prohibit international marriage brokers from releasing a foreign national client's personal contact information until the broker has informed the foreign national of the rights of domestic violence victims in the United States and received a signed consent to the release. Requires brokers to obtain specified background information from citizen or LPR clients and to forward such information to foreign nationals. Establishes civil and criminal penalties for violations of this Act. Authorizes States to bring civil actions for such violations in the U.S. district courts.
Requires petitioners for fiance(e) visas to undergo criminal history background checks.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Modifies consular processing procedures for fiance(e) visa applications to require specified disclosures to alien applicants.
Amends the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 to require an evaluation of the role of international marriage brokers in facilitating trafficking.
Requires a citizen or LPR client to provide to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, as part of a fiance(e) visa petition, the information that such clients are required to submit to brokers under this Act.
Prohibits a fiance(e) visa holder's awareness of the criminal background of a citizen or LPR client from being used as evidence that the marriage was not entered into in good faith.
People & committees
Sen. Cantwell, Maria [D-WA] · D–WA
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. (text of measure as introduced: CR S9961-9963)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9960-9961)
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.1455 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.1455 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.1455 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.1455 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.