VISIBLE Act
Sponsored By: Senator Alex Padilla
Introduced
Summary
Visible identification would be required for immigration officers when they carry out public-facing enforcement, with clear display rules and limits on face coverings to help the public know who is acting with federal immigration authority. The bill would also create discipline rules, annual reporting, and give the Department of Homeland Security’s Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties authority to receive complaints and investigate compliance.
Show full summary
- Families and community members would be able to see an officer’s agency and last name or badge number during public enforcement encounters, with agency markings required to be legible from at least 25 feet.
- Immigration officers and deputized personnel would have to display agency and name or unique badge number on their outermost garment, avoid non-medical face coverings that obscure identification unless the operation is truly covert or there are hazardous conditions, and face administrative discipline for violations such as reprimand or suspension.
- The Department of Homeland Security must report annually starting within one year on total public immigration enforcement actions, documented noncompliance, and disciplinary steps taken, while the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties may investigate complaints, make recommendations, and include findings in its public report.
Your PRIA Score
Personalized for You
How does this bill affect your finances?
Sign up for a PRIA Policy Scan to see your personalized alignment score for this bill and every other piece of legislation we track. We analyze your financial profile against policy provisions to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
2 provisions identified: 2 benefits, 0 costs, 0 mixed.
Oversight and reports on immigration enforcement
If enacted, the Secretary of Homeland Security would have to report within one year and every year after. Reports must list how many public immigration enforcement actions happened, how many times officers failed to follow the new ID rule, and what discipline or fixes were used. The Department’s civil rights office would take and investigate public complaints about ID violations, make compliance recommendations, and include findings in its annual public report. OCRCL could work with the DHS Office of Inspector General. These duties would start upon enactment.
Visible ID for immigration officers
This bill would require immigration officers who do public-facing enforcement to wear visible ID while on duty. The ID would show the agency name (or initials) and the officer’s last name or badge number. Agency ID must be readable from at least 25 feet and the ID must be on the outer garment and not covered. Non-medical face coverings that hide the ID or the officer’s face would be banned unless needed for covert operations or hazardous conditions. DHS would have to discipline officers who fail to follow the rule. These rules would take effect upon enactment.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Alex Padilla
CA • D
Cosponsors
Cory Booker
NJ • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Adam Schiff
CA • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Chris Van Hollen
MD • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Tammy Duckworth
IL • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Richard Blumenthal
CT • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Patty Murray
WA • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Mazie Hirono
HI • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Peter Welch
VT • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Ron Wyden
OR • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Tina Smith
MN • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Elissa Slotkin
MI • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Gary Peters
MI • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Andy Kim
NJ • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Amy Klobuchar
MN • D
Sponsored 7/8/2025
Jacky Rosen
NV • D
Sponsored 7/17/2025
Christopher Murphy
CT • D
Sponsored 9/2/2025
Richard Durbin
IL • D
Sponsored 9/2/2025
Christopher Coons
DE • D
Sponsored 9/2/2025
Edward Markey
MA • D
Sponsored 9/2/2025
Angela Alsobrooks
MD • D
Sponsored 9/4/2025
Martin Heinrich
NM • D
Sponsored 9/4/2025
John Reed
RI • D
Sponsored 11/18/2025
Kirsten Gillibrand
NY • D
Sponsored 1/29/2026
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.govRelated Bills
S51 — Washington, D.C. Admission Act
This bill would admit the District of Columbia as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, giving its residents full congressional representation. It would also carve out a separate federal 'Capital' around core federal buildings and set a staged transition for courts, services, and federal property. - Residents: District residents would gain two Senators and one Representative immediately upon admission and the current non‑voting Delegate office would be repealed. - Territory and federal limits: A defined Capital area including the Capitol, White House, Supreme Court, and adjacent federal lands would remain under U.S. title or jurisdiction and generally would not be subject to state taxation except where Congress permits. - Courts, justice, and transition supports: The bill would keep federal prosecution support, U.S. Marshals services, pretrial and public defender arrangements, and Bureau of Prisons housing rules during transition; it would provide a temporary Federal Medical Assistance Percentage uplift for five years and establish an 18‑member Statehood Transition Commission to oversee the change.
S1503 — Equality Act
Treat sexual orientation and gender identity as forms of sex discrimination across federal law. The bill would explicitly add sexual orientation and gender identity to federal sex‑discrimination protections and apply those rules across many statutes and programs.
S2295 — Child Care for Working Families Act
This bill creates a new, comprehensive federal entitlement for children from birth through five that guarantees access to affordable, high‑quality early care and learning. It pairs a universal preschool program with multi‑year grants to stabilize providers and new Head Start wage and expansion funding.
S852 — Richard L. Trumka Protecting the Right to Organize Act of 2025
Strengthens worker organizing rights and enforcement. The bill would expand who counts as employees and joint employers, speed representation and bargaining, require voter lists and workplace postings, and increase penalties and remedies for unfair labor practices. - Workers and jobseekers: Would broaden employee coverage and set a three-factor test that presumes employee status unless all three criteria are met. It would protect use of employer-provided electronic communications for organizing and clarify that the duration or pattern of strikes does not strip protection. - Employers and bargaining: Would require employers to provide unions detailed voter lists and timely notices. It would force a fast initial bargaining process with mandatory mediation and binding arbitration if negotiations fail. - Enforcement and remedies: Would expand National Labor Relations Board authority, allow private civil suits after a waiting period, make Board orders immediately effective, and raise civil penalties for unfair labor practices to up to $50,000 per violation and up to $100,000 for repeat or aggravated offenses.
S2150 — Women’s Health Protection Act of 2025
Guarantee nationwide protections for a person's right to obtain abortion services and a provider's right to deliver them. The Women's Health Protection Act of 2025 would create a federal rule that stops laws and rules that single out abortion or place heavier burdens on abortion than on similar medical procedures. It defines key terms, protects pre-viability care, allows post-viability care to protect life or health, and explicitly protects interstate travel and the movement of medicines, equipment, patients, and providers. - Families and patients: Would protect access to abortion before viability and allow post-viability care when needed to protect life or health. It would bar medically unnecessary in-person visit rules and stop forced disclosure of why a patient seeks care. - Health care providers: Would protect providers' ability to give abortion care including by telemedicine and across state lines, and would forbid facility, staffing, testing, or disclosure requirements that are not required for similar procedures. - States and interstate commerce: Would preempt conflicting state laws and recognize a right to travel and to assist others in getting reproductive health services across state lines. - Courts and enforcement: Would let the Attorney General sue and would create a private right of action so patients and providers can seek injunctive relief and attorney's fees. It would limit state sovereign immunity where federal law allows challenges.
S2523 — John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2025
This bill would restore and strengthen federal voting-rights protections by rewriting Section 2, creating a practice-based preclearance process for certain election changes, and boosting transparency and enforcement. - Voters in racial, language-minority, and Tribal communities would gain broader legal standards to challenge discrimination. The bill would add distinct Section 2 tests for vote-dilution, vote-denial, and intentional discrimination and add a retrogression standard that applies to actions taken on or after 2021. - State and local election officials would face new preclearance and public-notice rules. Covered changes like election methods, redistricting shifts, ID rules, polling-place moves, and voter-list removals would need review before implementation and require pre-election notices 30 days before Federal elections with 48-hour updates. - The Department of Justice and private citizens would get stronger tools to enforce rights. The Attorney General would centralize observers, extend bilingual protections to 2037, seek preventive relief, issue pre-action information demands, and pursue expanded court remedies.
Take It Personal
Get Your Personalized Policy View
Start a Free Government Policy Watch to see how policy affects your household, then upgrade to PRIA Full Coverage for year-round monitoring.
Already have an account? Sign in