Child Marriage Prevention Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 21, 2026
Bottom line
This bill seeks to eliminate child marriage in the U.S. through a multi-pronged federal approach, including research, state incentives, and comprehensive immigration policy reforms.
What it actually does
This bill establishes a National Commission to Combat Child Marriage, mandates Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports on child marriage in the U.S. and its intersection with immigration, creates a grant program for states to establish task forces, and offers incentives for states to prohibit marriage for individuals under 18. It also restricts child marriage on federal property and significantly amends immigration laws to generally prevent the issuance of marriage-based visas where one party was a minor, with a very narrow humanitarian exception.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that child marriage is a severe human rights violation with devastating consequences for education, health, and safety, increasing risks of poverty, violence, and abuse. They contend that a comprehensive federal strategy is necessary to address the patchwork of state laws and close loopholes in the immigration system that currently facilitate child marriage, aligning domestic policy with the U.S.'s stated foreign policy on preventing child marriage.
Opponents contend
No explicit organized opposition is stated in the bill text. However, potential critics might argue that some provisions, particularly the federal incentives for states to change marriage laws or the model state statute, represent an overreach of federal authority into matters traditionally reserved for states. Concerns could also be raised regarding the strictness of the immigration provisions, arguing that they might inadvertently harm vulnerable individuals in existing marriages by denying them a pathway to legal immigration, even with the narrow humanitarian exception.
The bill is moderately complex due to its detailed amendments to immigration law and the establishment of new federal programs, but it is manageable for an informed reader to evaluate within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 4
Establishes National Commission to Combat Child Marriage
This section creates a 10-member National Commission to Combat Child Marriage within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The Commission is tasked with conducting a comprehensive study on child marriage laws, prevalence, and impacts across the United States, reviewing existing findings, and submitting reports with recommendations to eliminate child marriage and improve services for survivors. It requires an interim report within one year and a final report within two years of its initial meeting.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that a comprehensive federal study and expert recommendations are crucial to understand the full scope and impact of child marriage in the U.S. and to develop effective, evidence-based solutions that can be applied across diverse state legal landscapes.
Critics contend
No specific opposition to a study commission is typically raised, though some might argue it duplicates existing efforts or represents an unnecessary federal expenditure without direct legislative action.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the need for thorough data collection and expert-informed policy recommendations with the time and resources required to establish and operate a federal commission.
Section 5
Mandates GAO Reports on Child Marriage in the U.S. and Immigration
This section requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to produce two sets of reports. The first, due within three years, will describe federal and state laws, the extent and circumstances of child marriages, and their impacts on individuals. The second, starting one year after enactment and every two years thereafter through 2035, will assess the extent to which noncitizens who were under 18 at the time of marriage are admitted to the U.S. as beneficiaries of spousal or fiancé visas.
Section 6
Establishes State Task Force Grant Program to Examine Child Marriage
This section amends the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act to authorize the Secretary of HHS to award competitive grants to 'eligible States' (those that permit individuals younger than 18 to marry). These grants are for establishing state-based task forces to collect statewide statistics on child marriage, examine risk factors and negative impacts, and develop policy recommendations to protect minors from child and forced marriages.
Section 7
Provides Increased Funding for States Prohibiting Child Marriage
This section authorizes the Attorney General to increase funding for states under the STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grant Program and the Sexual Assault Services Program. A state can receive an increase of up to 10% of its average prior awards, up to four times, if it has a law prohibiting marriage for individuals under 18 (or the state's age of majority if higher). The increased funds are allocated 25% to STOP grants and 75% to Sexual Assault Services.
Section 8
Prohibits Child Marriage on Federal Property
This section establishes a federal limitation, prohibiting any land or building owned by, leased to, or otherwise controlled by the Federal Government from being used to facilitate a marriage unless both individuals marrying are at least 18 years of age at the time of the marriage.
Section 9
DOJ to Promulgate Model State Statute on Child Marriage
This section requires the Attorney General to establish a working group within the Department of Justice. This group will, within 180 days of the National Commission's final report, promulgate a model state statute. The model statute will prohibit child marriage by requiring individuals to be at least 18 (or the state's age of majority), allow individuals married as minors to petition for their marriage to be voided, and restrict adult parties from voiding such marriages.
Section 10
Amends Immigration Law to Restrict Visas for Child Spouses/Fiancés
This section significantly amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to generally require both the U.S. citizen/lawful permanent resident (LPR) petitioner and the noncitizen beneficiary to be at least 18 years old at the time of marriage and petition filing for K visas (fiancé/spouse) and immediate relative/preference visas. It includes a very narrow humanitarian exception for noncitizens aged 16-17 if the state of intended residence would permit marriage AND there is a compelling, urgent humanitarian reason arising from a risk of individualized and targeted harm if the visa is denied (explicitly excluding parental consent, a child in common, or pregnancy as sufficient reasons). It also requires separate, private interviews for parties where one was under 18 at marriage/engagement and mandates public education on these changes.
The bill establishes a highly restrictive humanitarian exception for noncitizen spouses/fiancés aged 16-17. To qualify, the state of intended residence must permit marriage for that age, AND the applicant must establish a 'compelling, urgent humanitarian reason' arising from a risk of 'individualized and targeted harm' if the visa is denied. Crucially, it explicitly states that parental consent, having a child in common with the petitioner, or pregnancy are NOT sufficient reasons for this exception.
Section 10(b)(2)(A)(ii)(II)(dd), (B)(iii)(II)(bb), (C)(ii)(II)
Why it matters:While amending complex statutes often requires detailed, nested language, the explicit exclusion of common justifications for child marriage within the humanitarian exception is a significant policy choice that could be less visible to a casual reader.
Case for: Proponents argue this exception provides a necessary, albeit highly restricted, pathway for truly vulnerable minors in dire circumstances, preventing unintended harm while maintaining the bill's strong stance against child marriage. The explicit exclusions prevent the exception from becoming a loophole for practices the bill aims to combat.
Case against: Critics might argue that the exception is so narrow as to be practically ineffective for many legitimate cases, potentially leading to family separation or leaving vulnerable minors in dangerous situations abroad, even if their marriage was not forced. They may contend that common factors like parental consent or pregnancy, while not ideal, should be considered in humanitarian cases.
Estimated impact: This exception is likely to affect a very small number of cases due to its strict criteria. For those individuals who might qualify, the impact would be profound, determining their ability to immigrate to the U.S.
This section amends the definition of 'marriage' for immigration purposes (Section 101(a)(35) of the Immigration and Nationality Act) regarding proxy marriages. It changes the requirement from 'marriage shall have been consummated' to 'parties have met in person during the 2-year period immediately preceding the date of the ceremony.'
Section 10(c)
Why it matters:This is a technical amendment to an existing statutory definition, which is standard legislative practice. However, the specific change in criteria for recognizing proxy marriages is a substantive policy shift that could be easily missed by a casual reader.
Case for: Proponents argue this change strengthens safeguards against fraudulent marriages and ensures a genuine, in-person relationship exists, particularly in contexts where proxy marriages might be used to facilitate child marriage or human trafficking. It provides a clearer, more verifiable standard than 'consummation.'
Case against: Critics might argue it creates an unnecessary barrier for genuine couples who, due to circumstances (e.g., conflict zones, extreme poverty, or other travel restrictions), cannot meet in person within the specified timeframe, even if their proxy marriage is otherwise valid under applicable laws.
Estimated impact: This amendment will affect a subset of marriage-based visa applications, specifically those involving proxy marriages where the parties have not met in person within the two years prior to the ceremony. It is expected to reduce the number of such marriages recognized for immigration purposes.