UASI Act
- Bill Number
- S. 3920
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Immigration
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-02-25: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- Last Updated
- 2026-03-16T17:53:50Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The Unifying American Security Interests Act (UASI Act) aims to bolster homeland security by modifying eligibility rules for Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) grants. These grants fund high-risk urban areas to prepare for terrorism and other threats. The bill promotes collaboration between local entities and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on immigration enforcement, while also strengthening election security measures.
Key Provisions
- National Priority Areas Allocation: Grant applicants must dedicate at least 30% of the total award to five specified areas: enhancing cybersecurity, protecting soft targets and crowded places (like public venues), supporting Homeland Security Task Forces and Fusion Centers (information-sharing hubs), improving election security, and aiding border crisis response and enforcement.
- Minimum Funding Requirements:
- At least 3% of the grant must go toward election security activities.
- At least 10% must support border crisis response and enforcement, including:
- Participation in the 287(g) program under the Immigration and Nationality Act, which trains and authorizes local officers to handle certain immigration tasks, such as identifying and processing noncitizens who can be deported.
- Honoring ICE detainers (requests to hold individuals for federal immigration action) and related duties.
- Training law enforcement on immigration law, civil rights, and procedures.
- Building information-sharing systems or networks with ICE.
- Acquiring technology for screening, detection, and communication to aid immigration enforcement.
- Conducting joint training with ICE.
- Funding staff and overtime for activities like expanded screening in jails.
- Investment Justification and Coordination: Applicants must submit a detailed plan for border-related projects, showing alignment with national border security goals and requiring coordination with local ICE offices.
- Compliance Certifications: Applicants must certify that funded activities follow Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rules, including bans on actions that benefit or encourage illegal immigration.
- Penalties for Noncompliance: If grantees fail to meet allocation requirements, DHS can deny future grants, withhold up to 30% of funds until fixed, terminate awards, or bar grantees from future funding.
- Applicability: These rules apply to UASI grants starting in fiscal year 2027 and beyond.
- Rule of Construction: The Act does not override state or local laws unless necessary to meet federal grant conditions.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
The bill amends Section 2008 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 609) by adding a new subsection (h). This codifies (makes permanent in law) funding priorities from the fiscal year 2025 DHS grant notice, which emphasized border response via ICE cooperation and other threats. Previously, such priorities were administrative and could change with new leadership or be challenged in court; now they are statutory, ensuring consistency and reducing the risk of evasion through policy shifts or legal challenges.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: DHS and ICE gain formalized local partnerships for immigration enforcement, potentially easing federal workload but increasing administrative oversight for grant management. State and local agencies may need to reallocate budgets and train staff, risking funding loss if they resist cooperation.
- On Citizens: Urban residents in high-risk areas could see improved security in elections and public spaces, but increased local immigration checks might affect immigrant communities through more detentions or screenings. Law enforcement officers may face new training mandates.
- On International Relations: Enhanced border enforcement could strengthen U.S. immigration controls, signaling a tougher stance on illegal entry, but it might strain relations with countries of origin if deportations rise without broader diplomatic efforts.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial Governments: As grant applicants and administrators, they must comply with new allocation rules or forfeit funding.
- Urban Areas and Law Enforcement Agencies: High-risk cities and police/jail staff are directly impacted by requirements for ICE collaboration, training, and technology use.
- DHS and ICE: Benefit from mandatory local support but bear responsibility for certifications, justifications, and penalties.
- Immigrant Communities: Potentially face heightened scrutiny and enforcement actions in participating areas.
- Election Officials and Voters: Gain dedicated funding for securing elections against threats like interference or attacks.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: By codifying grant conditions, the Act limits future administrative flexibility and protects against court challenges to DHS priorities (e.g., on immigration enforcement). The rule of construction preserves state autonomy, avoiding direct preemption of "sanctuary" policies (local refusals to assist federal immigration), but ties compliance to federal funding, which could lead to lawsuits over coercion or federalism (the balance of power between national and state governments).
- Constitutional: Raises questions under the 10th Amendment (reserving powers to states) if viewed as pressuring locals into federal roles, though it's framed as voluntary grant conditions. Civil rights implications include ensuring training protects against discrimination in immigration actions.
- Political: Aligns federal funding with priorities like border security and election integrity, potentially polarizing debates in Congress or among localities—supporters see it as unifying security efforts, while critics may argue it politicizes grants or burdens non-federal entities. It could influence future DHS budgets and local-federal relations.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (1)
Recent Actions
- 2026-02-25: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- 2026-02-25: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- Unifying American Security Interests Act — issued 2026-02-25 — PDF (6 pages)