Access to Counsel Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 944
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Immigration
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-02-04: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2026-05-16T08:07:17Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The Access to Counsel Act (H.R. 944) aims to ensure that specific individuals at U.S. ports of entry or facilities managed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have clear rights to consult with a lawyer or other supporter during border inspections. It focuses on protecting access to legal advice and assistance early in the process to prevent rushed decisions that could affect immigration status.
Key Provisions
- Access During Inspections: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) must provide individuals undergoing secondary inspection (a more detailed check after initial screening) or deferred inspection (a later review) with a "meaningful opportunity" to consult with a lawyer or "interested party" (such as a family member or sponsor) via phone or other means. This must start within one hour of secondary inspection beginning and continue as needed.
- Role of Lawyers and Supporters: Lawyers and interested parties can advocate for the individual by sharing information, documents, or evidence with CBP officers. DHS must try to allow in-person appearances at the inspection site when possible.
- Special Protections for Lawful Permanent Residents (LPRs): LPRs (green card holders) cannot be asked to sign a form abandoning their status during secondary or deferred inspection without first getting advice from a lawyer, unless they knowingly and voluntarily waive this right in writing.
- Definitions:
- Counsel: A licensed attorney in good standing or an accredited representative from a recognized organization authorized to handle immigration cases.
- Covered Individual: Includes U.S. nationals, returning LPRs, people with valid immigrant or nonimmigrant visas, refugees, returning asylees (those granted asylum protection), and those approved for parole (temporary permission to enter the U.S.).
- Interested Party: Relatives, visa petitioners or sponsors (or their agents), or U.S.-based people, groups, or organizations with a genuine connection to the individual.
- Implementation: The law takes effect 180 days after enactment.
- Savings Clause: This does not reduce any existing rights to a lawyer, including government-appointed counsel in removal proceedings or other protections under current law.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Amends Section 235 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which governs inspections at ports of entry, by adding a new subsection (e). Previously, the INA did not explicitly require immediate access to counsel or supporters during secondary or deferred inspections, leaving it to agency discretion.
- Introduces mandatory timelines (e.g., within one hour) and protections against accepting status abandonment from LPRs without legal advice, filling gaps in due process at the border that have led to past lawsuits and inconsistencies.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: DHS and CBP will need to update training, facilities, and procedures to facilitate consultations, potentially increasing processing times at busy ports but reducing legal challenges and improving compliance with human rights standards.
- On Citizens and Individuals: Covered individuals, including U.S. citizens and legal residents, gain stronger safeguards against errors or coercion during border encounters, helping prevent wrongful detentions or status losses. This could benefit vulnerable groups like families, refugees, and visa holders by enabling quicker access to support.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though it may enhance the U.S. image as upholding fair treatment at borders, potentially aiding diplomatic efforts on migration issues.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Covered Individuals: U.S. nationals, LPRs, visa holders, refugees, asylees, and parolees who face secondary or deferred inspections.
- Government Entities: DHS and CBP, responsible for implementing access protocols.
- Legal and Support Networks: Attorneys, accredited immigration representatives, family members, sponsors, and organizations (e.g., immigrant rights groups) who can now more easily assist during inspections.
- Broader Immigration Community: Advocacy groups and petitioners who interact with the border system, gaining tools to protect clients or loved ones.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces due process requirements in immigration inspections, potentially reducing court backlogs from challenges over denied counsel access. It preserves all prior rights under the INA, avoiding conflicts with established precedents.
- Constitutional: Aligns with the Fifth Amendment's due process clause by ensuring fair procedures at the border, where individuals (even non-citizens) have some protections against arbitrary government actions. It does not create a right to free counsel but clarifies access to private representation.
- Political: Introduced by a group of Democratic representatives focused on immigration reform, it highlights debates over border enforcement versus individual rights, potentially influencing future legislation on detention and asylum without altering core enforcement powers.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7]
Cosponsors (73)
Rep. Ansari, Yassamin [D-AZ-3], Rep. Barragán, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44], Rep. Bonamici, Suzanne [D-OR-1], Rep. Casar, Greg [D-TX-35], Rep. Casten, Sean [D-IL-6], Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick, Sheila [D-FL-20], Rep. Chu, Judy [D-CA-28], Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-9], Rep. Crockett, Jasmine [D-TX-30], Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7], Rep. DeGette, Diana [D-CO-1], Rep. Espaillat, Adriano [D-NY-13], Rep. Garcia, Sylvia R. [D-TX-29], Rep. García, Jesús G. "Chuy" [D-IL-4], Rep. Grijalva, Raúl M. [D-AZ-7], Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4], Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17], Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8], Rep. Lee, Summer L. [D-PA-12], Rep. Leger Fernandez, Teresa [D-NM-3], Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-36], Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-18], Rep. McBride, Sarah [D-DE-At Large], Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-2], Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10], Rep. Meng, Grace [D-NY-6], Rep. Moore, Gwen [D-WI-4], Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-12], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Pocan, Mark [D-WI-2], Rep. Quigley, Mike [D-IL-5], Rep. Ramirez, Delia C. [D-IL-3], Rep. Scanlon, Mary Gay [D-PA-5], Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9], Rep. Smith, Adam [D-WA-9], Rep. Stansbury, Melanie A. [D-NM-1], Rep. Swalwell, Eric [D-CA-14], Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12], Rep. Tokuda, Jill N. [D-HI-2], Rep. Vargas, Juan [D-CA-52], Rep. Velázquez, Nydia M. [D-NY-7], Rep. Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [D-FL-25], Rep. Williams, Nikema [D-GA-5], Rep. Raskin, Jamie [D-MD-8], Rep. Pressley, Ayanna [D-MA-7], Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10], Rep. Carson, André [D-IN-7], Rep. Sánchez, Linda T. [D-CA-38], Rep. Omar, Ilhan [D-MN-5], Rep. Brownley, Julia [D-CA-26] and 23 more
Recent Actions
- 2025-02-04: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2025-02-04: Introduced in House
- 2025-02-04: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Access to Counsel Act — issued 2025-02-04 — PDF (6 pages)