Incentivizing Cooperation in Immigration Enforcement Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 8015
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-03-19: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2026-04-03T12:08:28Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The Incentivizing Cooperation in Immigration Enforcement Act (H.R. 8015) aims to encourage state and local governments to partner with federal immigration authorities by giving them priority access to certain federal law enforcement grants.
Key Provisions
- Amends Section 1701(c) of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (which governs priorities for grants like the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant program).
- Adds a new priority category (paragraph (4)) for grant applicants from states or local governments (e.g., cities or counties) that have a Section 287(g) agreement with the Secretary of Homeland Security.
- Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act allows local law enforcement officers to perform specific federal immigration enforcement tasks (like identifying and detaining removable immigrants) under federal supervision.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Expands the list of grant priorities by inserting a new item after existing ones (e.g., those addressing gang violence or drug trafficking).
- Makes technical edits to prior paragraphs (e.g., changing punctuation to add the new category seamlessly).
- No other substantive changes; focuses solely on grant prioritization.
Potential Impacts
- Government agencies: U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) grant administrators must prioritize applicants with 287(g) agreements, potentially shifting funding away from non-cooperating areas. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) may see increased local participation in immigration enforcement.
- Citizens and communities: Local law enforcement in cooperating areas could receive more funding for crime-fighting programs, but increased immigration checks might affect community trust, especially in immigrant-heavy areas.
- International relations: Minimal direct impact, though it could indirectly influence U.S. immigration policy perceptions abroad.
Main Stakeholders
- State and local governments/law enforcement: Primary beneficiaries if they enter 287(g) agreements; non-participants may lose grant competitiveness.
- Federal agencies: DOJ (grant distributor) and DHS/Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) (oversees 287(g) program).
- Immigrant communities: Potentially more scrutiny and enforcement in participating areas.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces federal incentives for local cooperation without mandating participation, avoiding direct commandeering of state resources (a federalism concern under the 10th Amendment).
- Constitutional: Aligns with Congress's immigration authority (Article I, Section 8); no apparent conflicts with anti-commandeering precedents like Printz v. United States (1997), as it uses funding incentives.
- Political: Could deepen debates over "sanctuary" policies versus federal-local immigration partnerships, influencing future grant allocations and enforcement trends.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Recent Actions
- 2026-03-19: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2026-03-19: Introduced in House
- 2026-03-19: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Incentivizing Cooperation in Immigration Enforcement Act — issued 2026-03-19 — PDF (2 pages)