ICE OUT Act

Bill Number

H.R. 7284

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 2

Policy Area

Immigration

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2026-01-30: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Last Updated

2026-02-20T16:47:13Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The ICE OUT Act aims to reform the legal protections known as "qualified immunity" for officers and agents of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) when they are involved in law enforcement activities. Qualified immunity is a court-made rule that shields government officials from lawsuits unless they violate clearly established rights. This bill seeks to make it easier to hold these specific federal agents accountable in civil rights lawsuits, particularly for cases involving excessive force.

Key Provisions

• Amendment to Federal Civil Rights Law: The bill modifies Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (42 U.S.C. 1983), which allows people to sue government officials for violating constitutional rights. It extends this law explicitly to federal officials (previously focused more on state and local ones) and adds new subsections tailored to ICE and CBP personnel.
• Limits on Immunity for Excessive Force: No qualified immunity defense is available if the facts alleged in a lawsuit show the agent used excessive force, which violates the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
• Narrowed Immunity in Other Cases: For all other alleged violations, immunity is only available if the agent's actions were consistent with rights clearly established by the Constitution or federal laws at the time of the incident.
• Court Review Process: Courts must first decide if the alleged facts show a constitutional violation before checking if the violated right was "clearly established." This reverses a common practice where courts sometimes skip the violation question and dismiss cases early.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Expansion of Section 1983: The law is updated to clearly include federal officials, closing a gap where federal agents (like those in ICE and CBP) could sometimes avoid liability more easily than state or local police.
• Targeted Reform of Qualified Immunity: Under current Supreme Court precedents (like in cases from the 1980s and later), qualified immunity often protects officials if there's no identical prior court ruling on the exact situation. This bill eliminates immunity outright for excessive force claims against ICE/CBP agents and requires a stricter, two-step analysis (violation first, then clarity of the right) for other claims, making dismissals harder.
• Specific Focus on Border Agencies: This is a narrow change applying only to ICE and CBP law enforcement activities, not to all federal or local officers, differing from broader reform proposals.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: ICE and CBP may face more civil lawsuits and financial liability (through settlements or judgments), potentially increasing costs for the Department of Homeland Security. It could lead to policy changes, like enhanced training, to reduce litigation risks.
• On Citizens: Individuals affected by ICE or CBP actions—often immigrants, border crossers, or detainees—may have an easier path to seek damages for rights violations, promoting greater accountability. However, it might not directly affect criminal enforcement powers.
• On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though increased scrutiny of border enforcement could influence perceptions of U.S. immigration practices abroad, potentially affecting diplomatic discussions on migration or human rights.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• ICE and CBP Officers/Agents: Directly lose some legal protections, facing higher personal and professional risks from lawsuits.
• Plaintiffs and Civil Rights Groups: Organizations like the ACLU or immigrant advocacy groups benefit from easier access to courts for claims of abuse.
• Department of Homeland Security: As the parent agency, it could see operational and budgetary strains from defending more cases.
• Federal Courts and Judges: Will handle more detailed reviews of immunity claims, potentially increasing caseloads in districts near borders.
• U.S. Taxpayers: Indirectly affected through government payouts in successful lawsuits.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal Implications: Strengthens enforcement of the Fourth Amendment in immigration contexts by removing a key barrier to lawsuits. It challenges the Supreme Court's qualified immunity framework without overturning it entirely, possibly inviting further judicial review or appeals.
• Constitutional Implications: Reinforces individual rights against government overreach, aligning with the Constitution's limits on federal power, but could raise questions about uniform treatment of all law enforcement (why only ICE/CBP?).
• Political Implications: As a targeted bill introduced by Democrats, it highlights partisan divides on police accountability and immigration enforcement. If passed, it could set a precedent for agency-specific reforms, fueling debates on balancing officer safety with civil liberties, especially amid ongoing discussions about border security and human rights.

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

Sponsor

Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10]

Cosponsors (4)

Rep. Swalwell, Eric [D-CA-14], Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46], Rep. Friedman, Laura [D-CA-30], Rep. DeGette, Diana [D-CO-1]

Recent Actions

• 2026-01-30: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
• 2026-01-30: Introduced in House
• 2026-01-30: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• ICE OUT Act — issued 2026-01-30 — PDF (3 pages)