Stop Excessive Force in Immigration Act of 2025

Bill Number

H.R. 5973

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Immigration

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-11-07: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Last Updated

2026-06-03T08:08:33Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The "Stop Excessive Force in Immigration Act of 2025" aims to limit the use of force by federal immigration enforcement personnel (such as those from Immigration and Customs Enforcement or ICE) during operations inside the U.S. It seeks to protect human rights, reduce community disruption, promote public safety through de-escalation, and ensure accountability while condemning violence against law enforcement. The bill emphasizes judicious use of authority, respect for constitutional rights (like free speech and protection from unreasonable searches), and minimal risk to bystanders, journalists, and protesters.

Key Provisions

The bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act (a key U.S. law governing immigration) by adding a new section (287A) that outlines rules for federal immigration enforcement. Major elements include:

• Use of Force Standards:
• Non-deadly force (e.g., physical restraint) is allowed only if no safer alternative exists, must be proportional to the threat, and considers factors like the subject's age, size, injury, or disability.
• Officers must judge force "reasonably" from the viewpoint of someone in a high-stress situation but are required to de-escalate tensions first and minimize injury to bystanders.
• An affirmative duty exists to intervene, stop, or report excessive force by colleagues; officers must also provide or request medical aid when needed.
• Limits on masks/face coverings and requires clear identification (e.g., uniforms showing agency affiliation, not "police") unless pre-approved for safety or security reasons.
• Officers do not need to retreat from resistance but cannot be aggressors.

• Restricted Equipment:
• Bans use of flash bangs (noise/flash devices), rubber bullets, pepper balls, and tear gas in most interior enforcement operations.
• Exceptions for border crossings, public safety/national security threats (e.g., terrorists or criminals), or high-risk arrests, but only with supervisor-approved plans, training, and certification.
• Backup teams with restricted gear can be deployed if primary officers' safety is at risk, but lawful protests do not count as a risk.

• Body-Worn and Dashboard Cameras:
• Mandatory within 180 days: All personnel must use body cameras (on by default) and vehicles must have dashboard cameras during operations.
• Includes training, best practices, and public notification of policies.
• Exceptions for areas with equivalent surveillance.
• Footage retained for 1 year minimum; longer (at least 3 years) for force incidents, complaints, or requests by involved parties (e.g., subjects, officers, or families).
• Rights to inspect (but not copy or alter) footage for subjects, their lawyers, families of minors/deceased, officers, Congress members, and defense counsel with a sworn claim of relevance.

• Training Requirements:
• Annual sessions on force policies, de-escalation techniques, First Amendment protections (for journalists and protesters), Fourth Amendment rights (against unreasonable searches/seizures), anti-racial profiling, intervention duties, medical aid, and operation documentation.

• Notification and Reporting:
• Federal agents must notify local law enforcement before operations in their area.
• DHS must report to Congress every 6 months on force uses, threats posed by targets, improper force, assaults on agents, anonymous operations, and mask use; includes a classified report on non-identification.
• DOJ reports every 6 months on impersonations of federal agents and efforts to combat them.
• DHS must maintain databases for certifications (for restricted equipment users) and incidents (force reports, anomalies, civil rights complaints), accessible to Congress (unredacted) and the public (redacted for privacy).

• Enforcement and Definitions:
• DHS's Office of Civil Rights and DOJ's Inspector General investigate and discipline violations.
• Supervisors accountable for improper approvals or uncertified equipment use.
• Defines "federal immigration enforcement personnel" as those arresting or supporting arrests under immigration laws; "national security threat" as dangers from groups like cartels or terrorists; "public safety threat" as immediate risks to others.

• Rule of Construction:
• Does not expand deadly force authority, hinder self-defense, or force state/local police to assist federal operations.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Adds detailed, specific rules to the Immigration and Nationality Act, which previously lacked comprehensive limits on force, equipment, cameras, and training for immigration enforcement.
• Introduces mandatory cameras, retention/inspection rules, and intervention/reporting duties not explicitly required before.
• Codifies existing guidelines (e.g., from DOJ's use-of-force manual or regulations on officer identification) into enforceable law with exceptions, bans on certain gear, and congressional oversight.
• Prohibits misidentification as "police" and restricts masks/anonymous operations more strictly than current practices.

Potential Impacts

• Government Agencies: DHS and DOJ face new administrative burdens, including camera implementation, annual training, database creation, and frequent reporting, potentially increasing costs but improving oversight and reducing lawsuits from force incidents. Local law enforcement gains advance notice, aiding coordination but not mandating involvement.
• Citizens: Immigrants, bystanders, journalists, and protesters may experience safer encounters with less aggressive tactics and better documentation for accountability. Public access to redacted data could build trust, while inspection rights empower individuals in complaints or legal cases. Broader community disruption from operations may decrease.
• International Relations: Could enhance the U.S.'s global image on human rights in immigration by curbing perceptions of excessive force, potentially improving diplomatic ties with countries critical of U.S. border policies, though it might limit operational flexibility against transnational threats like cartels.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Federal Immigration Personnel: ICE agents and support staff, who must follow stricter rules, undergo more training, and face discipline for violations.
• Immigrants and Communities: Undocumented individuals and families targeted in enforcement, benefiting from protections against excessive force and racial profiling.
• Journalists and Protesters: Protected from interference during lawful activities under the First Amendment.
• Local Law Enforcement: Notified of operations but not required to participate, affecting jurisdictional dynamics.
• Government Oversight Bodies: DHS (Civil Rights Office, Inspector General) and DOJ, tasked with investigations, reporting, and databases.
• Congress and Public: Gain access to reports and data for transparency and policy review.
• Families and Legal Representatives: Of those involved in incidents, with rights to footage and longer retention periods.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Strengthens enforcement of existing regulations (e.g., on identification during arrests) and creates clear penalties/discipline processes, potentially reducing civil rights lawsuits by standardizing "reasonable" force (aligned with Supreme Court precedents like Graham v. Connor, which judges force based on on-scene reasonableness).
• Constitutional: Explicitly reinforces First Amendment freedoms (no force against lawful journalists/protesters) and Fourth Amendment safeguards (against excessive searches/seizures and racial targeting), while upholding officers' self-defense rights without expanding deadly force.
• Political: Represents reformist pushback against perceived abuses in immigration enforcement, introduced by a bipartisan group of Democrats; could spark debates on balancing security with civil liberties, especially amid immigration policy tensions, but includes safeguards (e.g., exceptions for threats) to avoid undermining operations. The bill's focus on accountability may influence future oversight of federal law enforcement.

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

Sponsor

Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-50]

Cosponsors (111)

Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10], Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8], Rep. Velázquez, Nydia M. [D-NY-7], Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-9], Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17], Rep. Cisneros, Gilbert Ray [D-CA-31], Rep. Chu, Judy [D-CA-28], Rep. Schneider, Bradley Scott [D-IL-10], Rep. Vargas, Juan [D-CA-52], Rep. Randall, Emily [D-WA-6], Rep. Garcia, Sylvia R. [D-TX-29], Rep. Quigley, Mike [D-IL-5], Rep. Kelly, Robin L. [D-IL-2], Rep. Escobar, Veronica [D-TX-16], Rep. Panetta, Jimmy [D-CA-19], Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6], Rep. Sánchez, Linda T. [D-CA-38], Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-7], Rep. Thompson, Mike [D-CA-4], Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-12], Rep. Rivas, Luz M. [D-CA-29], Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13], Rep. Brownley, Julia [D-CA-26], Rep. Soto, Darren [D-FL-9], Rep. Ansari, Yassamin [D-AZ-3], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7], Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1], Rep. Tonko, Paul [D-NY-20], Rep. Bell, Wesley [D-MO-1], Rep. Garamendi, John [D-CA-8], Rep. Moore, Gwen [D-WI-4], Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10], Rep. Dean, Madeleine [D-PA-4], Rep. García, Jesús G. "Chuy" [D-IL-4], Rep. Trahan, Lori [D-MA-3], Rep. McClellan, Jennifer L. [D-VA-4], Rep. Pingree, Chellie [D-ME-1], Rep. Subramanyam, Suhas [D-VA-10], Rep. Budzinski, Nikki [D-IL-13], Rep. McClain Delaney, April [D-MD-6], Rep. Crockett, Jasmine [D-TX-30], Rep. Brown, Shontel M. [D-OH-11], Rep. Watson Coleman, Bonnie [D-NJ-12], Rep. Stanton, Greg [D-AZ-4], Rep. Beatty, Joyce [D-OH-3], Rep. Walkinshaw, James R. [D-VA-11], Rep. Pocan, Mark [D-WI-2], Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6], Rep. Barragán, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44] and 61 more

Recent Actions

• 2025-11-07: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
• 2025-11-07: Introduced in House
• 2025-11-07: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Stop Excessive Force in Immigration Act of 2025 — issued 2025-11-07 — PDF (20 pages)