Expedited Removal of Criminal Aliens Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Moody, Ashley [R-FL]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- May 21, 2025
Bottom line
The bill expands expedited removal authority to a broader range of criminal and national security-related alien categories, while simultaneously restricting their access to humanitarian protections like withholding of removal.
What it actually does
This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to establish a new section 238A, authorizing the mandatory detention and expedited removal of certain aliens. Specifically, it targets individuals determined by the Department of Homeland Security to be members of criminal gangs or foreign terrorist organizations, or those convicted of a felony, certain misdemeanors against vulnerable groups, or other specified violent and sexual offenses. It also explicitly makes these aliens ineligible for withholding of removal.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that this bill is a critical step to enhance national security and public safety by swiftly removing dangerous individuals from the United States. They contend that aliens who are gang members, terrorists, or have committed serious crimes pose an unacceptable risk and should not be allowed to remain in the country or exploit existing asylum processes. Supporters emphasize that the bill targets individuals who have forfeited any claim to protection through their criminal or terrorist activities.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that the bill could lead to due process concerns by expanding expedited removal without sufficient judicial review, potentially impacting individuals who may have legitimate claims or who are erroneously identified. They may also raise concerns about the broad definitions of 'criminal gang' or 'criminal organization' and the potential for inconsistent application across different jurisdictions, leading to unfair outcomes. Critics could also highlight the removal of eligibility for withholding of removal as a significant curtailment of humanitarian protections, potentially sending individuals back to dangerous situations.
The bill is short and its core provisions are clearly stated, making it accessible for a reader to evaluate its primary impacts within a short timeframe.
Section 2(a), new Section 238A(a)
Definition of 'Member of a Vulnerable Group'
This provision defines 'member of a vulnerable group' for the purposes of the bill. It includes children younger than 16, pregnant women, individuals with severe physical or mental disabilities, and individuals older than 65. This definition is crucial because it specifies a category of misdemeanors (crimes against a member of a vulnerable group) that would trigger expedited removal under the bill.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that protecting vulnerable populations from harm is a paramount concern, and that any alien who commits a misdemeanor against such a group should face expedited removal. This definition helps to clarify which specific criminal acts, even if classified as misdemeanors, are serious enough to warrant immediate removal.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue that defining 'vulnerable group' in this context, while seemingly protective, could lead to disproportionate consequences for certain misdemeanors, especially if the definition of 'misdemeanor' varies widely by jurisdiction. They may also contend that the focus should be on the severity of the crime rather than the characteristics of the victim, to avoid creating arbitrary distinctions.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the desire to protect vulnerable individuals with concerns about the proportionality of punishment and the potential for disparate application based on varying state and local legal definitions of misdemeanors.
Section 2(a), new Section 238A(b)
Aliens Subject to Mandatory Detention and Expedited Removal
This provision outlines the categories of aliens who would be subject to mandatory detention and expedited removal. These include individuals determined by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to be members of a criminal gang or organization, members or supporters of a foreign terrorist organization, or those convicted of a wide range of specified crimes. The crimes include any felony, misdemeanors against vulnerable groups, assault of law enforcement, sexual offenses, domestic violence, stalking, crimes against children, and violations of protection orders.
Section 2(a), new Section 238A(c)
Ineligibility for Withholding of Removal
This subsection explicitly states that any alien subject to expedited removal under the new Section 238A is not eligible for withholding of removal under any provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Withholding of removal is a form of protection that prevents an individual from being deported to a country where their life or freedom would be threatened due to race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.
The bill specifies that the terms for crimes (felony, misdemeanor, sexual offense, domestic violence, etc.) are defined 'as such terms are defined in the jurisdiction in which the acts constituting such crimes occurred.'
Section 2(a), new Section 238A(b)(3)
Why it matters:This phrasing is standard legislative practice to ensure that federal immigration law defers to the definitions of crimes as established by state or local jurisdictions where the offenses took place. It avoids the need for the federal bill to define every possible crime.
Case for: Supporters would argue this ensures consistency with existing legal frameworks and respects states' rights in defining criminal conduct. It prevents the federal government from creating new definitions for crimes already defined at the local level.
Case against: Critics might argue that this reliance on varied jurisdictional definitions could lead to inconsistent application of the expedited removal authority across the country. An act considered a misdemeanor in one state might be a felony equivalent in another, leading to disparate treatment for similar conduct depending on where the crime occurred.
Estimated impact: Potentially significant impact on the uniformity of application of expedited removal, leading to variations in who is subject to the new authority based on state criminal codes.