287(g) Program Protection Act
Sponsored By: Representative Cloud
Introduced
Summary
Expands state and local authority to carry out federal immigration functions through 287(g) agreements while shifting control and training standards to the Department of Homeland Security. The bill would reshape who approves and runs these partnerships and add uniform training, reporting, and funding lines.
Show full summary
- States and local law enforcement: Would let States and their political subdivisions enter written agreements with DHS to perform immigration investigations, arrests, detention, and transport at the State's expense. Requests must be processed within 90 days, there is no numerical cap on agreements, and denials or terminations require 180 days notice and an explanation.
- Department of Homeland Security and officers: DHS would replace the Attorney General as the approving official and must implement uniform training aligned to Federal Law Enforcement Training Center standards. Agreements must accommodate preferred enforcement models such as patrol, task force, or jail models and remain in effect during legal challenges.
- Transparency, funding, and planning: The bill would rename and move the fund to DHS as the Breached Bond/Detention/287(g) Fund and add a line for 287(g) administration. DHS must publish a rulemaking on training within 180 days and deliver annual performance reports and five-year recruitment plans by December 31 beginning the first fiscal year after enactment.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
4 provisions identified: 2 benefits, 0 costs, 2 mixed.
More local access to immigration agreements
If enacted, DHS would have to make a written 287(g) agreement when a State or local area asks. Qualified local officers could do immigration investigations, arrests, detentions, and transport at the local jurisdiction's expense. Requests must be processed within 90 days, and denials require a compelling reason plus 180 days' notice to Congress and a Federal Register explanation. The bill would also limit terminations: DHS could only end an agreement for a compelling reason and must give 180 days' written notice with evidence while the agreement stays in effect during appeals. Federal programs that broadly find deportable people could not replace 287(g) agreements.
DHS fund covers 287(g) costs
If enacted, the bill would rename and move the Breached Bond/Detention Fund to DHS as the Breached Bond/Detention/287(g) Fund. DHS would be able to use the fund to pay administrative expenses tied to running 287(g). This change would take effect on enactment.
Uniform training for local immigration officers
If enacted, DHS would set uniform training rules for officers doing immigration work under 287(g). Training must match Federal Law Enforcement Training Center standards in effect on enactment. DHS must publish a notice of rulemaking on these training rules within 180 days of enactment.
Annual 287(g) reports and recruitment plan
If enacted, DHS would publish two annual items by December 31 each year: a 287(g) performance report and a recruitment plan. The performance report must list counts of people apprehended and screened, people removed, people screened but not removed with reasons, oversight methods, training compliance, complaints, and agreement terminations with reasons. The recruitment plan must set five-year goals for new State and local participants, list outreach methods, and report counts of requests received, approved, denied, and pending.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Cloud
TX • R
Cosponsors
Roy
TX • R
Sponsored 1/28/2025
Ogles
TN • R
Sponsored 1/28/2025
Babin
TX • R
Sponsored 1/28/2025
Harris (MD)
MD • R
Sponsored 1/28/2025
Tenney
NY • R
Sponsored 1/28/2025
Biggs (AZ)
AZ • R
Sponsored 1/28/2025
Nehls
TX • R
Sponsored 1/28/2025
Weber (TX)
TX • R
Sponsored 2/4/2025
Schmidt
KS • R
Sponsored 2/4/2025
Rutherford
FL • R
Sponsored 2/5/2025
Biggs (SC)
SC • R
Sponsored 2/6/2025
Brecheen
OK • R
Sponsored 2/10/2025
Fry
SC • R
Sponsored 2/10/2025
Higgins (LA)
LA • R
Sponsored 2/11/2025
Cline
VA • R
Sponsored 3/21/2025
Wied
WI • R
Sponsored 6/4/2025
Mace
SC • R
Sponsored 10/10/2025
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.govRelated Bills
HR1301 — Death Tax Repeal Act
This bill would repeal the federal estate tax and the generation‑skipping transfer tax. It would also reshape gift tax rules by keeping tiered rates but creating a $10 million lifetime exemption indexed for inflation. - Heirs of people who die on or after enactment would not owe the federal estate tax. This removes that tax from those estates. - Donors and high‑net‑worth individuals would still face a gift tax, but under a tiered schedule from 18% to 35% and a $10 million lifetime exemption that is indexed for inflation after 2011. - Generation‑skipping transfers made on or after enactment would not be subject to the GST tax. Qualified domestic trusts for surviving spouses of decedents who died before enactment would follow transitional rules, including changed treatment of distributions after a 10‑year period beginning on the enactment date.
HR425 — Repealing Big Brother Overreach Act
Ends the Corporate Transparency Act and removes its amendments from federal law. It also adjusts related U.S. Code citations and parts of the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 to reflect that repeal. - Repeals the Corporate Transparency Act as title LXIV of division F of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) and removes all amendments made by that Act. - Edits Title 31, United States Code by removing or changing cross-references that mentioned section 5336 and updating references in sections 5321 and 5322. - Alters the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 by repealing section 6502 and striking or modifying portions of section 6509 as described in the bill.
HR38 — Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2025
National concealed-carry reciprocity. This bill would create nationwide recognition of state concealed-carry licenses so people with a valid photo ID and a state permit or the right to carry in their home State could carry a concealed handgun in many other States. - Gun owners and travelers: People not federally prohibited from firearms possession who hold a state concealed-carry license or are entitled to carry in their home State could carry a concealed handgun in States that issue permits or do not ban concealed carry. Machine guns and destructive devices are excluded. It would take effect 90 days after enactment. - State and property rights: States would keep the power to prohibit or restrict concealed carry on private property and on State or local government property. The bill also lists federal public lands and agencies where carrying would be allowed in publicly accessible areas, including National Park units and Forest Service land. - Criminal and civil protections: Officers may not arrest absent probable cause that the carry falls outside the law and prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt when the defense is raised. Prevailing defendants can recover reasonable attorney fees and may sue for deprivation of rights with damages.
HR273 — REMAIN in Mexico Act of 2025
Requires DHS to implement the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) under the January 25, 2019 Nielsen policy guidance. The bill would direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to carry out MPP consistent with that Nielsen memorandum and to apply that guidance as necessary to implement the program. - Migrants and asylum seekers: The bill would require migrants and asylees to be processed under the Migrant Protection Protocols as implemented per the 2019 Nielsen memo. - Department of Homeland Security and legal framework: The bill would bind DHS to the Nielsen memorandum and allow that guidance to take precedence over other legal provisions when carrying out MPP.
HR569 — Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025
Restrict who counts as "subject to the jurisdiction" for birthright citizenship by tying it to parents' legal status. This bill would rewrite the statutory definition in 8 U.S.C. 1401 to make parental status the determining factor for whether a U.S. birth qualifies under the jurisdiction test. - Families and children: A person born in the United States would be considered subject to the jurisdiction only if at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or national, a lawful permanent resident whose residence is in the United States, or an alien with lawful status who is actively serving in the armed forces. This ties eligibility to specific parental categories rather than territorial birth alone. - Noncitizen parents: Children born to parents who do not meet those listed parental statuses would not meet the statute's jurisdictional test for birthright citizenship under this framework. - Timing and grandfathering: The bill says these changes would not affect the citizenship or nationality status of anyone born before the law takes effect.
HR7296 — SAVE America Act
Requires documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register for federal elections and a nationwide tangible photo ID for voting. The bill pairs those rules with a rapid federal verification program using DHS SAVE and the Social Security Administration’s SSN Verification Service and sets tight setup deadlines for implementation.
Take It Personal
Get Your Personalized Policy View
Create a free account to save research, track policy impacts, and unlock your personalized versions of these pages.
Already have an account? Sign in