Terrorist Inadmissibility Codification Act

Bill Number

H.R. 3926

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Immigration

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-06-11: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Last Updated

2025-06-27T13:07:11Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The "Terrorist Inadmissibility Codification Act" (H.R. 3926) aims to update U.S. immigration law to explicitly classify certain individuals linked to designated terrorist organizations as engaging in "terrorist activity." This would make them ineligible for entry into the United States or certain immigration benefits under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The goal is to strengthen national security by broadening the criteria for inadmissibility based on affiliations or support for specific groups.

Key Provisions

• Amendment to INA Section 212(a)(3)(B)(i): This section of the INA lists grounds for inadmissibility due to terrorist activities. The bill modifies the language following subparagraph (IX) to expand its scope.
• Targeted Individuals and Groups:
• Officers, officials, representatives, spokespersons, and members of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Hamas, Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, ISIS (also known as the Islamic State), or Palestine Islamic Jihad.
• Any successor or affiliate groups to these organizations.
• Individuals who "endorse or espouse" (publicly support or promote) terrorist activities carried out by these groups.
• Short Title: The legislation is titled the "Terrorist Inadmissibility Codification Act."

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Expansion of Listed Organizations: Previously, the INA specifically referenced only the PLO in this context. The bill replaces this narrow reference with a broader list including Hamas, Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Palestine Islamic Jihad, plus their successors or affiliates.
• Addition of Supportive Actions: The amendment introduces "endorse or espouse" as a qualifying activity, meaning mere public advocacy for the groups' terrorist actions could trigger inadmissibility. This goes beyond direct membership or participation, codifying what may already be applied administratively but providing statutory clarity.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: U.S. agencies like the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) would enforce stricter screening for visa applications, asylum claims, and entry at borders. This could increase workload for vetting processes and lead to more denials or deportations.
• On Citizens and Residents: Primarily affects non-citizens, but could indirectly impact U.S. permanent residents (green card holders) or those seeking naturalization if they fall under the new criteria. U.S. citizens are not directly targeted, as inadmissibility applies to aliens (non-citizens).
• On International Relations: May heighten tensions with countries or entities sympathetic to the listed groups (e.g., in the Middle East), potentially complicating diplomatic efforts or refugee policies. It reinforces U.S. anti-terrorism stance, possibly aligning with allies like Israel but straining relations with nations hosting or tolerating these organizations.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Individuals and Groups: Members, leaders, or supporters of the specified terrorist organizations, including foreign nationals seeking U.S. entry, visas, asylum, or immigration status.
• Immigration Applicants: Broader pool of people from regions associated with these groups, facing heightened scrutiny.
• U.S. Government Entities: DHS, State Department, and judiciary, responsible for implementation and appeals.
• Advocacy and Human Rights Organizations: Groups monitoring immigration policies, civil liberties, or Middle East issues, who may challenge or support the bill's effects.
• International Actors: Governments or populations in conflict zones, where the listed organizations operate, potentially facing reduced U.S. engagement or aid tied to immigration restrictions.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal Implications: Strengthens the statutory basis for denying entry or benefits to those linked to terrorism, reducing reliance on executive discretion. However, terms like "endorse or espouse" could lead to litigation over vagueness—how courts define "support" in immigration cases (e.g., speeches, writings, or donations).
• Constitutional Implications: Raises potential First Amendment concerns for non-citizens abroad, as immigration decisions can limit speech without full U.S. constitutional protections. For those inside the U.S., it might affect due process in removal proceedings but does not directly restrict citizens' rights.
• Political Implications: Codifies long-standing U.S. designations of these groups as terrorists (e.g., via State Department lists), signaling bipartisan security priorities. It could influence foreign policy debates, especially amid ongoing conflicts involving these organizations, and face opposition from those viewing it as overly broad or discriminatory.

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

Sponsor

Rep. Pfluger, August [R-TX-11]

Cosponsors (3)

Rep. McCaul, Michael T. [R-TX-10], Rep. Schmidt, Derek [R-KS-2], Rep. Van Drew, Jefferson [R-NJ-2]

Recent Actions

• 2025-06-11: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
• 2025-06-11: Introduced in House
• 2025-06-11: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Terrorist Inadmissibility Codification Act — issued 2025-06-11 — PDF (2 pages)