No Round Up Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Mar 14, 2025
Bottom line
The "No Round Up Act" seeks to eliminate the legal basis for alien registration and fingerprinting requirements, removing a historical tool for government tracking of non-citizens and a ground for deportation.
What it actually does
This bill repeals the Alien Registration Act of 1940, which is codified in various sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Specifically, it eliminates requirements for certain aliens to register and be fingerprinted, removes related provisions concerning the Attorney General's authority to prepare forms for such registration, and repeals a clause making failure to register a ground for deportability. The core effect is to dismantle the legal framework for a national alien registration system.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the Alien Registration Act of 1940 is an outdated and discriminatory law that has historically been used to target specific immigrant communities, particularly during times of national tension. They contend that repealing it would remove a punitive and unnecessary burden on non-citizens, promote civil liberties, and align immigration law with modern values of inclusion and due process. Furthermore, they assert that the law's provisions are redundant or superseded by other immigration enforcement mechanisms, making its continued existence a symbolic rather than practical tool for enforcement.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that repealing the Alien Registration Act of 1940 would remove a critical tool for national security and law enforcement, making it harder for the government to track non-citizens within the country. They could contend that registration requirements are a reasonable measure to ensure public safety and maintain orderly immigration processes, especially for individuals who may pose a risk. They might also suggest that while the law's application has evolved, the underlying principle of knowing who is present in the country remains vital for border security and internal enforcement.
The bill text is extremely short and straightforward, allowing for a quick understanding of its legislative intent.
Section 2(a)(1)
Repeal of General Alien Registration Requirement
This provision directly repeals Section 262 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which mandated that all aliens in the United States, or those seeking admission, register and be fingerprinted. Its removal eliminates the statutory basis for a broad, national alien registration system.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this repeal removes an outdated and potentially discriminatory requirement that has historically been used to target specific immigrant groups, promoting civil liberties and reducing unnecessary burdens on non-citizens.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that this removes a valuable tool for national security and law enforcement, making it more difficult to track and monitor non-citizens within the country.
Tradeoffs
Balances civil liberties and reduced administrative burden for non-citizens against potential concerns about national security and government oversight of foreign nationals.
Section 2(a)(2)
Streamlining Registration for Special Categories
This provision amends Section 263, which deals with the registration of special categories of aliens. It strikes references to the repealed Section 262 and removes specific categories like "aliens confined in institutions" and "aliens under order of deportation" from mandatory registration, leaving only alien crewmen and alien visitors for business or pleasure as potentially subject to specific registration rules under Section 261. It also repeals subsection (b) of Section 263, which dealt with the Attorney General's authority regarding these special registrations.
Section 2(a)(3)
Removal of Registration Form Mandates
This provision amends Section 264 by striking language that authorized and directed the Attorney General to prepare forms for the registration and fingerprinting of aliens under the now-repealed Section 262. It also repeals subsection (e) of Section 264, which dealt with the issuance of alien registration receipt cards. This effectively removes the administrative infrastructure for the repealed registration system.
Section 2(a)(4)
Repeal of Annual Address Report for Registered Aliens
This provision repeals subsection (b) of Section 265, which required every alien required to be registered under Section 262 (now repealed) to notify the Attorney General of their current address and any change of address within ten days. The repeal eliminates this specific annual address reporting requirement tied to the general registration.
Section 2(a)(5)
Repeal of Penalties for Registration Violations
This provision repeals Section 266, which outlined criminal penalties for violations related to alien registration, such as failure to register, making false statements, or failing to carry an alien registration receipt card. Its repeal eliminates the legal basis for prosecuting these specific offenses.
Section 2(b)
Removal of Deportability for Registration Violations
This provision repeals clause (i) of section 237(a)(3)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which made an alien deportable if they were convicted of violating Section 266 (the penalty section, also repealed by this bill). This ensures that failure to register or other related offenses under the repealed Alien Registration Act no longer serve as a basis for deportation.
This provision repeals subsection (b) of Section 265 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which required aliens registered under the now-repealed Section 262 to notify the Attorney General of their current address and any change of address within ten days.
Section 2(a)(4)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for technical amendments and conforming changes. It's part of a comprehensive effort to dismantle the Alien Registration Act.
Case for: Supporters argue that this eliminates a burdensome and often unenforced requirement for non-citizens, reducing administrative overhead for both individuals and the government, and removing a potential trap for minor violations.
Case against: Critics might contend that removing this reporting requirement diminishes the government's ability to track foreign nationals, which could be important for national security or law enforcement purposes, especially for those whose status is uncertain.
Estimated impact: Reduces administrative burden on potentially millions of non-citizens and federal agencies, though the practical enforcement of this specific subsection may have varied.
This provision repeals a clause in the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(3)(B)(i)) that made an alien deportable if they were convicted of violating the now-repealed Section 266 (which outlined penalties for registration violations).
Section 2(b)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for ensuring consistency across different parts of the U.S. Code when a primary law is changed or repealed.
Case for: Proponents argue this is essential to prevent individuals from being deported for violations of a law that no longer exists, ensuring legal coherence and preventing unjust outcomes.
Case against: Opponents might argue that removing any ground for deportability, even one tied to an outdated law, could be perceived as weakening the overall framework for immigration enforcement.
Estimated impact: Prevents future deportations based on convictions under the repealed Alien Registration Act, affecting individuals who might otherwise face such proceedings.