Sarah’s Law

Bill Number

H.R. 578

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Immigration

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-01-21: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Last Updated

2025-04-18T15:16:31Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This legislation, titled "Sarah's Law" (H.R. 578), aims to strengthen immigration enforcement by mandating the detention of certain non-U.S. citizens (referred to as "aliens" in the law) who are accused or convicted of serious crimes involving death or severe harm to others. It also requires notifying victims or their families about the individual's status to enhance transparency and support for those affected.

Key Provisions

• Mandatory Detention Requirement: Amends Section 236(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which governs the detention of non-citizens during immigration proceedings. It adds a new category for individuals who must be detained without the option for release on bond or parole. These individuals are:
• Inadmissible to the U.S. (e.g., due to fraud or misrepresentation in entry, or certain health/moral grounds under INA Section 212(a)).
• Deportable (e.g., if their visa was revoked or they violated immigration terms under INA Section 237(a)(1)).
• Charged, arrested, convicted, or admitted to committing a crime that resulted in the death or serious bodily injury (defined as significant physical harm, like broken bones or organ damage, under federal criminal law at 18 U.S.C. § 1365(h)(3)) of another person.
• Victim Notification: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) must gather information from law enforcement about victims and provide timely updates to the victim (or, if deceased, their parent, guardian, spouse, or closest relative). This includes the individual's full name, aliases, birth date, nationality, immigration and criminal history, custody status, and efforts to deport them.
• Detainer and Custody: DHS must issue a detainer (a formal request to hold the person for ICE pickup) for qualifying individuals and take them into custody promptly if not already detained by other authorities.
• Savings Clause: Ensures this law does not reduce victims' rights under existing federal laws, such as the Crime Victims' Rights Act (18 U.S.C. § 3771), which guarantees rights like notice of proceedings and protection from the accused.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Expands the list of mandatory detention categories in INA Section 236(c)(1) by adding a new subparagraph (E), linking immigration detention directly to serious criminal accusations or convictions causing death or injury—previously, mandatory detention focused more on prior convictions or certain aggravated felonies, without this specific trigger for charges or arrests.
• Makes minor grammatical and structural edits to existing subparagraphs (e.g., changing "sentence" to "sentenced" in subparagraph (C) for clarity).
• Introduces new subsections (3) and (4) to the INA, requiring victim notifications and detainers, which were not previously mandated in this context. This shifts from discretionary to obligatory actions by DHS.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: Increases workload for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and DHS, including tracking cases, issuing detainers, and notifying victims, potentially straining resources and requiring better coordination with local law enforcement.
• On Citizens and Victims: Provides greater access to information for crime victims or families, potentially aiding emotional closure and safety, but could raise privacy concerns if notifications are mishandled.
• On Non-Citizens: Leads to automatic detention for those fitting the criteria, limiting their ability to contest removal while in custody and possibly prolonging separation from family or community during legal proceedings.
• On International Relations: May signal a stricter U.S. stance on immigration enforcement tied to crime, potentially affecting diplomatic ties with countries of origin if deportations increase, though it focuses domestically on U.S. victims.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Non-Citizens (Aliens): Primarily undocumented immigrants, visa holders, or others deemed inadmissible/deportable who face criminal charges for violent offenses; they risk immediate detention and expedited removal.
• Crime Victims and Families: U.S. citizens or residents harmed by such crimes, who gain new rights to information about the perpetrator's immigration process.
• Law Enforcement and DHS/ICE: Federal, state, and local agencies must share data and comply with detainers, affecting operations in arrests and custody transfers.
• Immigration Advocates and Legal Groups: Organizations supporting immigrants may challenge detentions on grounds of fairness or resource allocation.
• Members of Congress: Bipartisan group of House representatives (mostly Republicans) who introduced the bill, reflecting interests in public safety and victim rights.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal Implications: Reinforces the intersection of criminal and immigration law by treating serious crime accusations as grounds for mandatory detention, potentially speeding up deportations but inviting lawsuits over whether mere charges (without conviction) justify detention without bond—existing INA precedents allow this for certain categories, but it could expand litigation.
• Constitutional Implications: Raises due process questions under the Fifth Amendment (fair treatment in legal proceedings) for detainees, as automatic custody limits hearings on release; however, it aligns with Supreme Court rulings upholding mandatory detention for public safety in immigration cases (e.g., Demore v. Kim, 2003). No direct impact on First Amendment or equal protection is evident.
• Political Implications: Advances a "tough on crime and immigration" agenda, named after a victim ("Sarah") to emphasize personal stakes, which could influence broader debates on border security and victim rights without altering core deportation processes. It may face opposition in the Senate or from civil liberties groups concerned about overreach.

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

Sponsor

Rep. Feenstra, Randy [R-IA-4]

Cosponsors (53)

Rep. Tenney, Claudia [R-NY-24], Rep. Ciscomani, Juan [R-AZ-6], Rep. Estes, Ron [R-KS-4], Rep. Bost, Mike [R-IL-12], Rep. Rouzer, David [R-NC-7], Rep. Nehls, Troy E. [R-TX-22], Rep. DesJarlais, Scott [R-TN-4], Rep. Finstad, Brad [R-MN-1], Rep. Bacon, Don [R-NE-2], Rep. Salazar, Maria Elvira [R-FL-27], Rep. Aderholt, Robert B. [R-AL-4], Rep. Miller, Mary E. [R-IL-15], Rep. Garbarino, Andrew R. [R-NY-2], Rep. McClintock, Tom [R-CA-5], Rep. Mace, Nancy [R-SC-1], Rep. Bergman, Jack [R-MI-1], Rep. Meuser, Daniel [R-PA-9], Rep. Miller-Meeks, Mariannette [R-IA-1], Rep. Balderson, Troy [R-OH-12], Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3], Rep. Hinson, Ashley [R-IA-2], Rep. Babin, Brian [R-TX-36], Rep. Edwards, Chuck [R-NC-11], Rep. Schmidt, Derek [R-KS-2], Rep. Tiffany, Thomas P. [R-WI-7], Rep. Weber, Randy K. Sr. [R-TX-14], Rep. Hamadeh, Abraham [R-AZ-8], Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8], Rep. Timmons, William R. [R-SC-4], Rep. Moolenaar, John R. [R-MI-2], Rep. LaMalfa, Doug [R-CA-1], Rep. Crenshaw, Dan [R-TX-2], Rep. Wied, Tony [R-WI-8], Rep. Ogles, Andrew [R-TN-5], Rep. Brecheen, Josh [R-OK-2], Rep. Nunn, Zachary [R-IA-3], Rep. Ellzey, Jake [R-TX-6], Rep. Rulli, Michael A. [R-OH-6], Rep. Downing, Troy [R-MT-2], Rep. Thompson, Glenn [R-PA-15], Rep. Sessions, Pete [R-TX-17], Rep. McDowell, Addison [R-NC-6], Rep. Johnson, Dusty [R-SD-At Large], Rep. Biggs, Sheri [R-SC-3], Rep. McCormick, Richard [R-GA-7], Rep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4], Rep. Rutherford, John H. [R-FL-5], Rep. Hudson, Richard [R-NC-9], Rep. Harris, Andy [R-MD-1], Rep. Donalds, Byron [R-FL-19] and 3 more

Recent Actions

• 2025-01-21: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
• 2025-01-21: Introduced in House
• 2025-01-21: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Sarah’s Law — issued 2025-01-21 — PDF (4 pages)