PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6519)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 11, 2007
Passport and Visa Security Act of 2007 - Amends the federal criminal code to revise provisions relating to the unauthorized issuance of U.S. passports to prohibit any person, during any three-year period, from: (1) producing, issuing, or transferring 10 or more passports without lawful authority; (2) forging, counterfeiting, altering, or falsely making such passports; (3) transacting sales of or distributing such counterfeit passports; or (4) making 10 or more false applications for passports. Imposes a fine and/or prison term of up to 20 years for violations.
Revises criminal prohibitions against: (1) making false statements in an application for a passport; (2) forgery and unlawful production of a passport; (3) misuse of a passport; and (4) immigration and visa fraud, including trafficking in counterfeit immigration documents. Makes the punishment for attempts or conspiracies to commit passport or visa fraud the same as for the completed crime.
Prohibits in connection with federal immigration laws: (1) any scheme to defraud persons seeking benefits under such laws; and (2) false representation of attorney (or accredited representative) status.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Grants extraterritorial jurisdiction for the prosecution of certain passport and visa fraud offenses.
Directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to revise its sentencing guidelines and policies relating to passport and visa fraud offenses.
Directs the Attorney General to develop prosecution guidelines for compliance with U.S. treaty obligations relating to asylum seekers entering the United States with fraudulent documents.
Expands the investigative authority of State Department special agents relating to passport and document fraud.
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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6519)
Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 110-103.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S461-463)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S459-460)
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.276 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.276 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.276 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.276 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.