Stop Illegal Entry Act of 2025
- Bill Number
- H.R. 3486
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Immigration
- Status
- Passed House
- Latest Action
- 2025-09-15: Received in the Senate.
- Last Updated
- 2026-07-11T00:58:24Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The "Stop Illegal Entry Act of 2025" (H.R. 3486) aims to strengthen border security by increasing criminal penalties for unauthorized entry into the United States and for reentry after prior removal (deportation). It targets individuals who violate immigration laws, especially those with criminal histories, to deter illegal immigration.
Key Provisions
- Amendments to Section 275 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) (covers improper entry):
- Increases the maximum prison term for first-time improper entry (e.g., crossing at undesignated points, evading inspection, or using false information) from 2 years to 5 years.
- Adds a new subsection (e): If an individual enters improperly and is later convicted of any crime punishable by more than 1 year in prison, they face a mandatory minimum of 5 years in prison (up to life), plus fines.
- Amendments to Section 276 of the INA (covers reentry after removal):
- General rule: Anyone removed (or similar action) who reenters without permission faces up to 10 years in prison and fines.
- Enhanced penalties for specific cases:
- Up to 15 years if previously convicted of 3 or more misdemeanors involving drugs or crimes against people (e.g., assault).
- Mandatory 10 years (cannot run concurrently with other sentences) for those previously excluded or removed due to terrorism-related grounds.
- Up to 10 years for those removed for national security reasons under specific INA sections.
- Up to 10 years for those with 3 or more prior removals.
- Mandatory minimum: At least 10 years (up to life) if the person had a prior conviction for an aggravated felony (serious crimes like murder or drug trafficking), any felony, or any crime punishable by over 1 year in prison before removal.
- Defines "removal" broadly to include cases where individuals agree to deportation during criminal trials.
- Updates references to modernize terms (e.g., from "Attorney General" to "Secretary of Homeland Security").
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Raises baseline penalties for initial illegal entry from up to 2 years to 5 years.
- Introduces mandatory minimum sentences (5–10 years) for repeat offenders or those with criminal records, which were not previously required in many cases.
- Expands categories for harsher reentry penalties, including more misdemeanor triggers and national security exclusions, replacing prior, less severe graduated penalties (e.g., old maximums were often 5–20 years but without minima).
- Broadens the definition of removal to cover stipulated agreements in court, closing potential loopholes.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: Increases workload for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Justice (DOJ) in prosecuting cases, potentially requiring more resources for immigration enforcement, detentions, and deportations. Could lead to higher incarceration costs for federal prisons.
- On Citizens: May enhance public safety by deterring criminals from reentering, but could indirectly affect communities through stricter enforcement at borders and more deportations.
- On International Relations: Might strain ties with countries whose nationals face higher penalties, potentially complicating diplomatic efforts on migration or extradition, though it focuses domestically on U.S. law enforcement.
- Overall, aims to reduce unauthorized entries but could overcrowd the justice system without additional funding.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Undocumented Immigrants: Primary targets, facing steeper risks of long prison terms before deportation, especially repeat entrants or those with criminal records.
- Federal Agencies: DHS (handles borders and removals), DOJ (prosecutions), and federal courts (increased caseloads).
- U.S. Citizens and Legal Residents: Indirectly benefited through potentially safer borders but possibly burdened by higher taxes for enforcement.
- State and Local Governments: Affected if federal policies lead to more cross-jurisdictional enforcement or impacts on local crime rates tied to immigration.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Strengthens prosecutorial tools under the INA but could face challenges if mandatory minimums are seen as disproportionately harsh (e.g., under the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment). Expands "removal" definitions, potentially affecting due process in immigration courts.
- Constitutional: Raises questions about equal protection if penalties disproportionately impact certain nationalities, though it applies uniformly to non-citizens. Aligns with Congress's broad authority over immigration but may test separation of powers by shifting some discretion from judges to mandatory sentences.
- Political: Signals a tough stance on border security, likely appealing to enforcement advocates but criticized by immigration reform groups for being overly punitive without addressing root causes like asylum or pathways to legal status. Passed by the House in 2025, it reflects ongoing debates on immigration policy in a divided Congress.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Bice, Stephanie I. [R-OK-5]
Cosponsors (5)
Rep. Knott, Brad [R-NC-13], Rep. Zinke, Ryan K. [R-MT-1], Rep. Schmidt, Derek [R-KS-2], Rep. Gill, Brandon [R-TX-26], Rep. Luna, Anna Paulina [R-FL-13]
Recent Actions
- 2025-09-15: Received in the Senate.
- 2025-09-11: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- 2025-09-11: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 226 - 197 (Roll no. 264). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H4242) (Roll call 264)
- 2025-09-11: Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 226 - 197 (Roll no. 264). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H4242: 4) (Roll call 264)
- 2025-09-11: Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H4250)
- 2025-09-11: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 3486, the Chair put the question on passage of the bill and by voice vote, announced the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Raskin demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
- 2025-09-11: The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
- 2025-09-11: DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 3486.
- 2025-09-11: Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3838 and H.R. 3486. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 3838 under a structured rule and H.R. 3486 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.
- 2025-09-11: Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 682. (consideration: CR H4242)
- 2025-09-09: Rule H. Res. 682 passed House.
- 2025-09-09: Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 682 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3838 and H.R. 3486. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 3838 under a structured rule and H.R. 3486 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.
- 2025-07-15: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 163.
- 2025-07-15: Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 119-200.
- 2025-07-15: Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 119-200.
Bill Versions
- Stop Illegal Entry Act of 2025 — issued 2025-09-11 — PDF (8 pages)
- Stop Illegal Entry Act — issued 2025-05-19 — PDF (6 pages)
- Stop Illegal Entry Act of 2025 — issued 2025-07-15 — PDF (8 pages)