Upholding Protections for Unaccompanied Children Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Sen. Cortez Masto, Catherine [D-NV]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jan 7, 2026
Bottom line
The bill seeks to reverse recent changes that imposed fees and altered protections for unaccompanied alien children, aiming to reduce financial barriers and enhance privacy for this vulnerable population, while also mandating refunds for previously collected fees.
What it actually does
This bill amends Public Law 119-21 to exempt unaccompanied alien children (UACs) from various immigration-related fees, including those for asylum applications, employment authorization documents, and immigration court proceedings. It also repeals the fee for Special Immigrant Juvenile status for UACs, removes certain provisions related to body examinations for UACs, and restricts information sharing between HHS and DHS regarding UAC sponsors for immigration enforcement purposes. The bill further mandates refunds for fees previously paid by or on behalf of UACs under the provisions being repealed or amended.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that Public Law 119-21 created undue financial burdens and procedural obstacles for unaccompanied alien children, hindering their ability to seek asylum and legal status. They contend that these fees and relaxed protections endanger children, making it harder for them to access legal processes and potentially exposing their sponsors to immigration enforcement. This bill aims to restore previous protections and ensure UACs can pursue legal remedies without prohibitive costs or fear of reprisal for their sponsors, aligning with humanitarian principles.
Opponents contend
Opponents of this bill (and proponents of Public Law 119-21) would likely argue that the fees and previous changes were necessary measures to manage the influx of migrants, deter fraudulent claims, and ensure accountability within the immigration system. They might contend that exempting UACs from fees creates a loophole, encourages further irregular migration, and that information sharing is crucial for national security and immigration enforcement. They may also argue that the previous law aimed to streamline processes or ensure proper vetting.
The bill is short and clearly written, making it accessible for a quick but informed review.
Section 2(a), (b), (d), (e)
Exemptions for Unaccompanied Alien Children from Various Immigration Fees
This provision creates exceptions for unaccompanied alien children (UACs) from paying fees for asylum applications, annual asylum fees, initial employment authorization documents, and renewals of employment authorization for parolees, asylum applicants, and those with Temporary Protected Status. It ensures that UACs, or those previously determined to be UACs, do not face financial barriers to these critical immigration processes, thereby enhancing their access to legal protections and work authorization.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that these fees disproportionately burden vulnerable children who often lack financial resources, creating significant barriers to seeking protection and legal status. Exempting them ensures access to justice and aligns with humanitarian principles, preventing children from being penalized for their circumstances.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue that fee exemptions reduce funding for immigration services, potentially slowing down processing for all applicants. They may also contend that fees are a necessary deterrent to frivolous applications or a way to ensure some cost recovery for government services, and that UACs should not be entirely exempt.
Tradeoffs
The tension is between ensuring access to legal protections for vulnerable children and maintaining revenue streams for immigration services, as well as potentially managing perceived incentives for migration.
Section 2(c)
Repeal of Special Immigrant Juvenile Status Fee
This section repeals Section 100005 of Public Law 119-21, which imposed a fee for Special Immigrant Juvenile (SIJ) status applications. It further clarifies that the Secretary of Homeland Security cannot impose any fee in connection with any alien, parent, or legal guardian applying for SIJ status, ensuring that UACs seeking this specific protection are not charged.
Section 2(f), (g)
Exemptions for UACs from Immigration Court and In Absentia Removal Fees
This provision amends Public Law 119-21 to exempt unaccompanied alien children (UACs) from various immigration court fees and from the fee associated with in absentia removal proceedings. This ensures that UACs are not penalized financially for participating in their legal proceedings or for circumstances that might lead to an in absentia order, which can often be due to lack of understanding or legal representation.
Section 2(h)
Exemption for UACs from Border Apprehension Fee
This section amends Public Law 119-21 to exempt unaccompanied alien children (UACs) from the border apprehension fee. This means UACs will not be charged a fee simply for being apprehended at the border, removing a financial penalty associated with their arrival.
Section 3
Reinstatement of Protection Screenings for UACs
This section amends Public Law 119-21 by striking paragraph (8) of Section 100051. While the exact content of the stricken paragraph (8) is not provided in this bill, the title 'Upholding Protection Screenings and a Fair Legal Process' suggests that this repeal aims to restore or strengthen certain protection screenings for UACs that were undermined by the previous law, ensuring children are properly identified for vulnerabilities.
Section 4(a) and (b)
Restrictions on Body Examinations for UACs
This section amends Public Law 119-21 by striking specific paragraphs related to body examinations conducted by both the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). While the exact content of the stricken paragraphs is not provided, the intent is to remove provisions that allowed or mandated certain body examinations for UACs, thereby limiting such potentially intrusive practices.
Section 5
Restriction on Information Sharing for Immigration Enforcement
This section adds a new subsection to Public Law 119-21, mandating that the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) ensure information obtained about unaccompanied alien child (UAC) sponsors is not shared with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or any other federal agency for the purpose of enforcing immigration laws. This aims to protect sponsors from immigration enforcement actions based on their contact with UACs, encouraging more individuals to come forward.
Section 6
Refund of Previously Paid Fees
This section mandates that within 180 days of the Act's enactment, the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General must refund any fees paid by or on behalf of individuals who are now exempt from such payments under this Act. The refund is to be issued to the individual or entity who paid the fee, providing retroactive financial relief.
These sections repeal specific paragraphs from Public Law 119-21 related to 'protection screenings' and 'body examinations' for unaccompanied alien children. Without the text of PL 119-21, the precise nature of the original provisions being removed is not immediately clear from this bill alone.
Section 3 (striking paragraph (8) of Section 100051 of PL 119-21) and Section 4 (striking paragraphs (3) of Section 87001(b) and (11) of Section 100051 of PL 119-21).
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for amending existing law by reference. It is not necessarily evasive, but it does require external research for full comprehension, making it less accessible to a casual reader.
Case for: This method is efficient for legislative drafting, avoiding lengthy restatements of existing law. It assumes legislators and informed readers have access to the referenced statutes and can quickly identify the changes.
Case against: For the general public, this approach makes it difficult to understand the full impact of the bill without consulting external legal texts, potentially obscuring significant policy shifts that directly affect vulnerable populations.
Estimated impact: The impact is significant, as it directly reverses specific policies related to UAC screenings and examinations, affecting the rights and treatment of all UACs in government custody.