PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

No Asylum for CCP Spies Act

Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 21, 2023

No Asylum for CCP Spies Act

This bill makes a non-U.S. national (alien under federal law) who has been affiliated with the Communist or a totalitarian party ineligible for asylum. The bill provides exceptions for an applicant who establishes that such affiliation was involuntary or limited or, alternatively, has significant information relating to national security,

Under the bill, a non-U.S. national who is or has been a member of or affiliated with the Communist or any totalitarian party (including a subdivision or affiliate thereof) is ineligible for asylum. (Under current law, such affiliation makes a non-U.S. national ineligible for a visa or lawful permanent resident status, with certain exceptions.)

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Such an individual may become eligible for asylum if the individual (1) publicly renounces his or her membership before applying; (2) denounces such party during the adjudication process; (3) has been determined by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or Department of Justice (DOJ) not to be a danger to U.S. security; and (4) establishes that such party affiliation was involuntary, automatic, to obtain employment or living essentials, or only while the individual was younger than 16 years of age. 

Alternatively, DHS or DOJ may waive these requirements if a non-U.S. national seeking asylum (1) has significant information relating to national security, (2) renounces the party affiliation or membership and denounces the totalitarian party, and (3) is determined not to be a danger to the United States.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL] · R–FL

Committees

  • Judiciary Committee
8 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

  2. Introduced in Senate

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze S.2905 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine S.2905 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine S.2905 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine S.2905 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.

View full prompt & sources