The Effect of Private Immigration Legislation and Recent Policy Changes

The Effect of Private Immigration Legislation and Recent Policy Changes

Legal Sidebari

The Effect of Private Immigration Legislation
and Recent Policy Changes
February 1, 2023
For many years, private immigration bills have served as the last step to prevent the removal of certain
aliens (as defined in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)) who are subject to final orders of
removal. Generally, this practice has been reserved for a very small group of aliens who, while having
been deemed by the private bills’ sponsors to have extraordinary equities in the United States, are also—
for whatever reason—statutorily ineligible for any relief under existing federal immigration laws.
Supporters of the use of private immigration bills argue that they serve as “a critical safety net” in
situations where the aliens’ removal would result in great hardship for their families in this country.
Alternatively, opponents contend that private bills undermine the fair and uniform administration of the
nation’s immigration laws.
In general, the goal of a private immigration bill is to confer lawful permanent resident status on an alien
beneficiary, thus bypassing the typical procedures to obtain such status in this country. By contrast, most
aliens who seek to become lawful permanent residents have to apply for adjustment of status based on an
approved visa petition, and demonstrate their admissibility for permanent residence (or if they are in
removal proceedings, they may apply for cancellation of removal if they can meet certain statutory
requirements). Nevertheless, private immigration bills have rarely been passed by Congress. Out of
several hundred such proposed bills within the past 15 years, few have been signed into law.
When a private immigration bill is introduced, the identified alien’s legal status remains unchanged. Prior
to 2017, it had been the longstanding policy of the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) (and before that, the Department of Justice’s Immigration and Naturalization
Service) to authorize a stay of removal of the alien upon receiving a request for information about the
alien from either the Senate or House Judiciary Committee or Subcommittee where the private bill was
referred. (More information about the process for introduction and consideration of private bills in
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
LSB10909
CRS Legal Sidebar

Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress

Congressional Research Service
2
Congress can be found in this CRS report and in the House Judiciary Committee’s Rules of Procedure
and Statement of Policy for Private Immigration Bills.)
In 2017, during the Trump Administration, ICE’s Acting Director Thomas D. Homan sent a letter to
Senator Charles Grassley, then-Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, advising of changes to the
agency’s policy with respect to granting stays of removal pending the outcome of private immigration
bills. Homan expressed concern that the longstanding process could thwart ICE’s efforts to remove aliens
who, under the administration’s policy, were considered priorities for removal, such as criminal aliens,
aliens who have committed fraud, aliens who have abused a public benefits program, aliens subject to a
final order of removal, and aliens “who pose a risk to public safety or national security.”
Homan thus announced four “policy changes” with respect to private immigration bills: (1) ICE would
only grant a stay of removal if the House or Senate committee/subcommittee expressly made a written
request for a stay of removal “independent of any request for an investigative report”; (2) ICE would not
grant an alien more than one stay of removal during the private immigration bill process, and would not
consider subsequent stays requests from the House or Senate committee/subcommittee; (3) ICE would
grant a stay of removal for only six months, but, upon request by the House or Senate
committee/subcommittee, could issue a one-time 90 day extension “to accommodate extenuating
circumstances”; and (4) ICE would take “appropriate action,” including the removal of the alien, if it
received “derogatory information” about the alien after granting a stay.
In 2021, under the Biden Administration, ICE announced an “updated” policy on private immigration
bills that appears generally to return to the agency’s previous practice. According to ICE, the agency is
“to provide investigative support” when Congress introduces a private bill, and to consider “stays of
removal or other remedies” for beneficiaries of a bill in certain cases. Specifically, the appropriate House
or Senate committee/subcommittee must submit a written request addressed to the ICE Director (or
Acting Director) for an investigative report concerning the beneficiary of the private bill, and the report
should be provided to the ICE Office of Congressional Relations. ICE has stated that a response to
Congress is to generally occur within 30 to 90 days.
ICE further announced that, once a private bill is introduced and ICE receives a request for an
investigative report, it will “temporarily refrain” from engaging in any immigration enforcement actions
against the bill’s beneficiary (e.g., initiate removal proceedings, execute a final removal order) until the
bill is signed into law; or, if Congress adjourns without acting on the bill, until March 15 of the first
session of the following Congress. ICE advised that the introduction of a private bill alone (or an
indication of an intent to introduce such bill) would not prompt consideration of a stay of removal or other
relief for the bill’s beneficiary. ICE also advised that it may deny a request for stay of removal or revoke a
previous stay, and take enforcement action against an alien who is the subject of a private bill, if there is
evidence showing that such action is warranted. ICE indicated that it would notify the appropriate
congressional committee when these circumstances occur.
Although ICE’s private immigration bill policy may continue to change over time, Congress may
consider modifying its own existing rules governing the private immigration bill process to ensure that
aliens seeking to benefit from such legislation receive prompt consideration by the agency of their
requests to remain in the United States during that process. In addition, ICE’s changing policies may
expedite

Congressional Research Service
3
congressional consideration of private immigration bills—potentially increasing the likelihood that some
bills could be acted upon before the agency takes action.

Author Information

Hillel R. Smith

Legislative Attorney

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

LSB10909 · VERSION 1 · NEW