Overview

Title

To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to immediately initiate removal proceedings for aliens whose visas are revoked on security or related grounds.

ELI5 AI

S. 3587 says if someone's visa is taken away because they might be dangerous, the government has to try to send them back to their home country right away. Once this happens, the person doesn't get to ask a judge to stop it.

Summary AI

S. 3587 is a proposed law that requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to start immediate removal proceedings for any foreign nationals whose visas are revoked due to security or related concerns. The bill seeks to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, making it mandatory for the Secretary to take action if a visa is canceled for security reasons listed in the law. It also specifies that there will be no judicial review available once the removal proceedings are initiated.

Published

2024-01-11
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: SENATE
Status: Introduced in Senate
Date: 2024-01-11
Package ID: BILLS-118s3587is

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
2
Words:
374
Pages:
3
Sentences:
11

Language

Nouns: 101
Verbs: 36
Adjectives: 5
Adverbs: 4
Numbers: 18
Entities: 20

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.10
Average Sentence Length:
34.00
Token Entropy:
4.51
Readability (ARI):
17.92

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The proposed legislation, known as the "Mandatory Removal Proceedings Act," is aimed at changing the current protocols surrounding the removal of certain non-citizens from the United States. Specifically, it requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to begin immediate removal proceedings for individuals whose visas are revoked due to security or related concerns. This bill seeks to amend the existing Immigration and Nationality Act to ensure rapid enforcement actions against those deemed a security risk.

Summary of Significant Issues

A central issue with this bill is the lack of specificity regarding the criteria or evidence necessary for revoking an individual's visa on security grounds. This absence of clarity could result in arbitrary or inconsistent enforcement. Furthermore, the bill does not outline a process for those affected to appeal these decisions before removal proceedings start, raising potential due process concerns. The terminology "security or related grounds" is also not explicitly defined, which might lead to varied interpretations and enforcement inconsistencies. Additionally, the legislative text uses complex legal references, which could hinder comprehension by the general public.

Public Impact Considerations

Broadly, the enactment of this bill could heighten the sense of urgency and decisiveness in handling non-citizens who may pose security threats. On one hand, it could reassure the public about their safety, knowing that immediate actions are in place to handle potential risks. On the other hand, the lack of detailed procedures or defined terms may lead to public concern over whether the rights and fair treatment of individuals are being upheld, as the potential for unfair targeting or mistakes exists without clear guidelines and avenues for appeal.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For policymakers and immigration enforcement agencies, this bill offers a tool to promptly address national security concerns. However, without explicit guidelines, these stakeholders might face challenges and backlash due to perceived injustices or overreach. Non-citizens residing in the U.S. on visas might feel increased anxiety over their status, particularly without the guarantee of a fair process to contest revocations. Legal professionals and civil rights advocates may have concerns regarding due process rights and the protection of individuals from arbitrary governmental actions. They might be tasked with challenging the application of this law and seeking amendments that ensure clarity and protect civil liberties.

Issues

  • The bill mandates immediate removal proceedings for aliens whose visas are revoked on security or related grounds, but it does not specify the criteria or evidence required for such revocation, which could lead to arbitrary or inconsistent decision-making and potential abuses of power (Section 2).

  • The bill lacks a defined process to appeal the visa revocation before removal proceedings are initiated, raising concerns about the potential violation of due process rights for the affected individuals (Section 2).

  • The terms 'security or related grounds' are not clearly defined within the bill, potentially leading to varied interpretations and inconsistent application, which could affect fairness and transparency in enforcement (Section 2).

  • The language of the bill, particularly the use of legislative cross-references, may be difficult for those without legal expertise to understand, impacting public understanding and oversight (Section 2).

  • The 'Short title' section does not provide details or context about the act, which may lead to ambiguity regarding its purpose and scope. Providing a brief description or intent could improve comprehension (Section 1).

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section of this Act states that it will be known as the "Mandatory Removal Proceedings Act."

2. Mandatory initiation of removal proceedings for aliens whose visas are revoked on security or related grounds Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines changes to the Immigration and Nationality Act, requiring the Secretary of Homeland Security to start removal proceedings for aliens whose visas are revoked due to security or related reasons, and specifies that there is no available judicial review for these proceedings.