BE GONE Act
- Bill Number
- S. 1517
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Immigration
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-04-29: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2025-12-05T21:59:17Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The BE GONE Act (S. 1517) aims to expand the definition of an "aggravated felony" under U.S. immigration law. This change would make it easier and faster to deport non-citizens (referred to as "aliens" in the law) who have been convicted of sexual assault or aggravated sexual violence, treating these crimes as serious offenses that trigger automatic removal proceedings.
Key Provisions
- Amends Section 101(a)(43) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which lists what qualifies as an "aggravated felony" for immigration purposes.
- Adds a new category: "sexual assault and aggravated sexual violence" as subparagraph (V).
- Makes technical adjustments to the existing list, such as adding punctuation to integrate the new entry smoothly.
An aggravated felony under the INA is a serious crime that generally makes non-citizens ineligible for most forms of immigration relief and subject to mandatory deportation.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Previously, the INA's aggravated felony definition included crimes like murder, drug trafficking, and certain sexual abuses (e.g., sexual abuse of a minor), but it did not explicitly cover all instances of sexual assault or aggravated sexual violence.
- This bill broadens the definition to explicitly include these offenses, closing a potential gap and ensuring they are treated as aggravated felonies regardless of specifics like the victim's age (unless already covered under other subcategories).
- The change applies to convictions, meaning past or future guilty verdicts for these crimes would qualify non-citizens for expedited removal.
Potential Impacts
- On government agencies: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other immigration authorities could process deportations more quickly for affected individuals, reducing case backlogs and judicial discretion in removal hearings.
- On citizens: U.S. citizens are unaffected directly, but the law could indirectly benefit public safety by prioritizing the removal of non-citizens convicted of serious sexual crimes, potentially reducing recidivism risks in communities.
- On non-citizens: Legal permanent residents, visa holders, or undocumented immigrants convicted of these offenses face faster deportation with limited appeals, limiting their ability to stay in the U.S.
- On international relations: Minimal direct impact, though it could strain ties with countries receiving deportees if removal volumes increase, or signal a stricter U.S. stance on immigration enforcement.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Non-citizen immigrants: Primarily those convicted of sexual assault or aggravated sexual violence, including lawful permanent residents and temporary visa holders, who risk swift deportation.
- U.S. immigration enforcement agencies: Such as ICE and the Department of Homeland Security, which would enforce the expanded rules.
- Victims and advocacy groups: Organizations focused on sexual violence prevention may support the bill for prioritizing removal of convicted offenders, while immigrant rights groups could oppose it for potentially harsh consequences without considering rehabilitation.
- Federal courts: Immigration judges may see streamlined caseloads but handle more mandatory removal cases.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal implications: Strengthens deportation mechanisms under the INA, potentially reducing due process opportunities for affected non-citizens (e.g., fewer waivers or hearings). The broad terms "sexual assault" and "aggravated sexual violence" might lead to future court challenges over what qualifies as a conviction, depending on state laws.
- Constitutional implications: Aligns with existing immigration powers under the Constitution (Article I, Section 8), but could raise equal protection concerns if applied unevenly; however, non-citizens have limited constitutional protections in deportation matters.
- Political implications: Introduced by a bipartisan group of senators with a focus on tough-on-crime immigration policy, it reflects ongoing debates on balancing enforcement with humanitarian considerations. If passed, it could influence broader immigration reform efforts by emphasizing public safety priorities.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (17)
Sen. Crapo, Mike [R-ID], Sen. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND], Sen. Justice, James C. [R-WV], Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA], Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX], Sen. Graham, Lindsey [R-SC], Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID], Sen. Marshall, Roger [R-KS], Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT], Sen. Ricketts, Pete [R-NE], Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK], Sen. Hawley, Josh [R-MO], Sen. Scott, Tim [R-SC], Sen. Hyde-Smith, Cindy [R-MS], Sen. Collins, Susan M. [R-ME], Sen. Hoeven, John [R-ND], Sen. McCormick, David [R-PA]
Recent Actions
- 2025-04-29: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2025-04-29: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- Better Enforcement of Grievous Offenses by unNaturalized Emigrants — issued 2025-04-29 — PDF (2 pages)