Guaranteeing the States Protection Against Invasion Act of 2026
- Bill Number
- H.R. 7105
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Immigration
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-01-15: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2026-03-16T12:30:06Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The legislation aims to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to grant the President authority to declare an "invasion" at the U.S.-Mexico southern border, based on Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution (which requires the federal government to protect states from invasion). It enables suspension of entry for unauthorized border crossers and denial of immigration benefits during such a declaration, with the goal of enhancing border security and repelling perceived threats.
Key Provisions
- Declaration of Invasion (New Section 212A): The President can proclaim an invasion at the southern border (defined as the U.S.-Mexico land border). Congress must be notified within 7 days of the proclamation or its termination.
- Suspension of Entry (Amendment to Section 212(f)): During a declared invasion, the President must suspend the entry—including physical entry—of any non-citizen (alien) who unlawfully enters or attempts to enter across the southern border, overriding other laws.
- Ineligibility for Immigration Relief (New Section 208A): Non-citizens who unlawfully cross the southern border during an invasion become ineligible for any form of relief, protection, or benefit under the INA that would allow them to stay in the U.S. This includes asylum (Section 208), withholding of removal (Section 241(b)(3)), parole (Section 212(d)(5)), and other relief specified by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Courts have no jurisdiction to review these decisions, except for claims of U.S. nationality.
- Public Health and Security Information (Amendment to Section 212(a)): During an invasion, non-citizens must provide information before entry to assess health risks, criminal history, and security threats. Failure to do so makes them inadmissible and subject to immediate removal, repatriation, or transfer.
- Authority to Repel and Remove (New Section 6): The DHS Secretary, in coordination with the Secretary of State and Attorney General, must take actions to repel the invasion, detain/expel/remove involved non-citizens, and prevent further entries. The President can deploy federal personnel and resources for this purpose.
- Termination: All related authorities end when the President proclaims the invasion has concluded.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Expands presidential powers under INA Section 212(f) by mandating entry suspensions specifically for southern border unlawful entries during an invasion, rather than leaving it discretionary.
- Introduces new absolute bars to immigration relief (e.g., asylum and parole) for unlawful southern border crossers, which were previously available under certain conditions.
- Adds a jurisdictional strip, limiting courts from reviewing invasion-related decisions, a departure from standard judicial oversight in immigration cases.
- Imposes new pre-entry information requirements tied to invasions, with automatic inadmissibility consequences, strengthening enforcement over existing health and security grounds in INA Section 212(a).
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: Increases responsibilities for DHS (e.g., repelling invasions, rapid removals), the State Department (coordination), and the Justice Department (legal support), potentially requiring more resources for border operations. The President gains broader deployment authority for federal assets.
- Citizens: U.S. citizens and border communities may see enhanced security measures, but could face indirect effects like increased federal presence or disruptions. No direct impact on citizens' rights, though it invokes constitutional protections for states.
- International Relations: Could strain U.S.-Mexico relations by framing migration as an "invasion," potentially leading to diplomatic tensions or cooperation challenges on border issues. May affect repatriation processes with Mexico.
- Non-Citizens/Migrants: Severely restricts pathways to stay in the U.S. for those crossing the southern border unlawfully during an invasion, leading to higher rates of expulsion and limited legal recourse.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Government: President (declaration and resource deployment), DHS (enforcement lead), Congress (notification recipient), and Department of Justice (coordination and limited court involvement).
- State Governments: Border states (e.g., Texas, Arizona) benefit from the constitutional invocation of protection against "invasion," potentially gaining federal support for local security.
- Non-Citizens: Primarily migrants and asylum-seekers attempting southern border entry, who face barred relief and expedited removal.
- Courts and Legal System: Immigration judges and federal courts, with reduced jurisdiction over invasion-related cases.
- International Actors: Mexican government, as the southern border partner, and broader migrant-sending countries.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Constitutional: Directly ties to Article IV, Section 4's "invasion" clause, potentially expanding interpretations of what constitutes an invasion (e.g., mass migration) beyond traditional military threats, which could invite legal challenges on overreach.
- Legal: The no-jurisdiction provision limits due process in immigration proceedings, raising separation-of-powers concerns by curtailing judicial review—a key feature of U.S. immigration law. It may conflict with international obligations like non-refoulement (prohibiting return to persecution) under treaties, though the bill prioritizes domestic authority.
- Political: Positions border security as a national defense issue, likely fueling debates on immigration policy. Could empower executive action in politically charged contexts but risks accusations of politicizing migration; implementation depends on future administrations' willingness to declare invasions.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Recent Actions
- 2026-01-15: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2026-01-15: Introduced in House
- 2026-01-15: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Guaranteeing the States Protection Against Invasion Act of 2026 — issued 2026-01-15 — PDF (5 pages)