District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act of 2025

Bill Number: H.R. 2056
Origin Chamber: House
Congress: 119th Congress, Session 1
Policy Area: Immigration
Status: Passed House
Latest Action: 2025-06-12: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Last Updated: 2026-07-10T19:08:27Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The legislation, titled the "District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act of 2025," aims to ensure that the District of Columbia (DC) fully cooperates with federal immigration enforcement by prohibiting local policies that limit such cooperation. It targets what are often called "sanctuary" practices, where local governments restrict sharing information or assisting with federal immigration actions.

Key Provisions

Prohibition on Restrictive Policies: DC is barred from enacting or maintaining any law, rule, policy, or practice that prevents or limits DC government entities or officials from:
Sharing, receiving, or exchanging information about an individual's citizenship or immigration status (whether legal or illegal) with federal, state, or local government bodies.
Following lawful requests from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under sections 236 or 287 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). These sections deal with detaining individuals for immigration violations (detainers) and requesting notifications about their release from local custody.
Short Title: The act is formally named the "District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act of 2025."
Status: The bill passed the House of Representatives on June 12, 2025, but has not yet been enacted into law.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

This would override any current or future DC laws, ordinances, or policies that act as barriers to federal immigration enforcement, such as limits on sharing immigration data or honoring federal detainer requests (formal holds on individuals in local custody for potential deportation).
It introduces a federal mandate specifically targeting DC, building on broader national debates about sanctuary jurisdictions but applying directly to the nation's capital, which operates under unique federal oversight as a district rather than a state.

Potential Impacts

On Government Agencies: DC agencies, like police and correctional facilities, would need to align operations with federal requirements, potentially increasing administrative burdens and costs for data sharing and compliance. Federal agencies like DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) could see improved coordination and efficiency in enforcing immigration laws in DC.
On Citizens and Residents: Undocumented immigrants in DC might face higher risks of identification and deportation due to mandatory information sharing and detainer compliance. Legal residents and citizens could experience indirect effects through changes in local policing or community trust in government services.
On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though it could signal U.S. commitment to stricter immigration enforcement, potentially affecting perceptions of the U.S. as a destination for migrants.

Main Stakeholders Affected

DC Government and Officials: Local agencies and leaders must revise policies to comply, facing potential legal penalties for non-adherence.
Undocumented Immigrants in DC: Directly impacted by increased vulnerability to federal enforcement actions.
Federal Immigration Authorities (e.g., DHS, ICE): Benefit from enhanced local cooperation.
DC Residents and Businesses: Could see shifts in community dynamics, such as reduced willingness to report crimes if immigrant communities fear involvement with authorities.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

Legal: Reinforces federal supremacy in immigration matters under the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article VI), which prioritizes federal law over local rules. It could lead to lawsuits if DC challenges the bill's scope or enforcement.
Constitutional: Raises questions about DC's limited self-governance as a federal district (not a state), potentially testing the balance between local autonomy and national security interests in immigration.
Political: Highlights ongoing national debates on immigration policy, with implications for federal-local power dynamics; it may fuel partisan discussions on sanctuary cities without broader national application in this bill.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3]

Cosponsors (1)

Rep. Moore, Barry [R-AL-1]

Recent Actions

2025-06-12: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
2025-06-12: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
2025-06-12: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 224 - 194 (Roll no. 171). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: 6/11/2025 CR H2634) (Roll call 171)
2025-06-12: Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 224 - 194 (Roll no. 171). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: 6/11/2025 CR H2634) (Roll call 171)
2025-06-12: On motion to recommit Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 205 - 215 (Roll no. 170). (Roll call 170)
2025-06-12: Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2808-2810)
2025-06-11: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 2056, the Chair put the question on the motion to recommit and announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Lynch demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
2025-06-11: The previous question on the motion to recommit was ordered pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX.
2025-06-11: Mr. Lynch moved to recommit to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. (text: CR H2638-2639)
2025-06-11: The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
2025-06-11: DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 2056.
2025-06-11: Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 884, H.R. 2056, H.R. 2096 and S. 331. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 884, H.R. 2056, H.R. 2096, and S. 331 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate for each bill. The resolution provides for one motion to recommit on H.R. 884, H.R. 2056, and H.R. 2096, and one motion to commit on S. 331.
2025-06-11: Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 489. (consideration: CR H2634-2639)
2025-06-09: Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 489 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 884, H.R. 2056, H.R. 2096 and S. 331. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 884, H.R. 2056, H.R. 2096, and S. 331 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate for each bill. The resolution provides for one motion to recommit on H.R. 884, H.R. 2056, and H.R. 2096, and one motion to commit on S. 331.
2025-06-03: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 100.

Bill Versions

District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act of 2025 — issued 2025-06-12 — PDF (4 pages)
District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act — issued 2025-03-11 — PDF (2 pages)
District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act of 2025 — issued 2025-06-12 — PDF (2 pages)
District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act of 2025 — issued 2025-06-03 — PDF (6 pages)