State-Sponsored Visa Pilot Program Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Sen. Curtis, John R. [R-UT]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 30, 2026
Bottom line
The bill decentralizes a portion of immigration policy to individual states, allowing them to directly address specific labor and economic development needs through a new, highly regulated nonimmigrant visa program, while also offering a conditional pathway to legal status for some long-term undocumented residents.
What it actually does
This bill establishes a new "W" nonimmigrant visa category, creating a State-sponsored nonimmigrant pilot program. States can apply to sponsor aliens who will reside and work within their borders, contributing to economic development. The program includes detailed requirements for State participation, alien eligibility, employment authorization, numerical limitations, and mechanisms for compliance and enforcement, including mandatory bonds and penalties for non-compliance. It also provides a pathway for certain undocumented aliens present since 2016 to adjust status through this program.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill empowers states to tailor immigration to their unique economic and labor market demands, fostering local growth and innovation. They contend it provides a flexible mechanism to address workforce shortages and attract investment, while also creating a structured, compliant pathway for some currently undocumented individuals to contribute openly to the economy and pay taxes, thereby strengthening the rule of law and reducing the shadow economy.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that decentralizing immigration authority to states could lead to a patchwork of inconsistent policies, complicate federal enforcement, and potentially depress wages for U.S. workers if not rigorously overseen. Concerns could also be raised about the potential for exploitation of nonimmigrants, the administrative burden on states and federal agencies, and the provision allowing certain undocumented individuals to adjust status, which some may view as an amnesty that incentivizes future unauthorized immigration.
The bill is moderately complex and requires careful reading, especially regarding the numerical formulas and compliance mechanisms, which may exceed the time typically allotted for quick legislative review.
Section 2
Establishment of State-Sponsored Nonimmigrant (W) Visa Category
This section amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to create a new nonimmigrant visa classification, designated as "W". This visa allows foreign nationals to temporarily come to the United States to reside in a specific State, performing services, providing capital investment, directing enterprises, or otherwise contributing to that State's economic development agenda as determined by the State. It also extends this status to the alien spouse and minor children of the principal applicant.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is foundational, enabling states to directly address their unique economic and labor needs by attracting specific talent or investment, rather than relying solely on federal programs that may not be tailored to local conditions.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that creating a new visa category, especially one tied to state-level economic agendas, could fragment national immigration policy and potentially lead to inconsistent standards or competition among states for foreign labor/investment.
Tradeoffs
Balances federal control over immigration with state autonomy in economic development. It aims to provide flexibility for states while introducing a new layer of complexity to the immigration system.
Section 3(a), amending INA Section 214(s)(3)
State Program Approval Requirements
This provision outlines the mandatory criteria a State's application must meet for its State-sponsored nonimmigrant program to be approved by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Key requirements include legislative approval by the State, regulation of employment and residence, procedures to inform federal authorities of non-compliance, allowing nonimmigrants to change employers within the State, periodic assessment of labor needs and wages, mechanisms for investigating worker displacement complaints, an attestation that hiring will not displace U.S. workers, and annual reporting on nonimmigrant residence and employment.
Section 3(a), amending INA Section 214(s)(6)
Period of Authorized Status and Termination Conditions
This provision sets the initial period of authorized status for State-sponsored nonimmigrants at a maximum of 3 years, with renewals possible if the sponsoring State requests it and the nonimmigrant has continuously resided in that State (or compact of States). It also specifies conditions for termination of status, including residing or working outside the sponsoring State, failing to follow State rules, or the sponsoring State requesting termination (unless another State sponsors the nonimmigrant).
Section 3(a), amending INA Section 214(s)(12)
Federal Public Benefits Ineligibility and Employer Payments
This section stipulates that State-sponsored nonimmigrants are ineligible for any Federal means-tested benefits or entitlements. It also mandates that employers of these nonimmigrants pay an amount equivalent to the Federal tax on wages (FICA/FUTA) into the general fund of the Treasury, treating nonimmigrants as full-time employees for certain Internal Revenue Code purposes related to health plans. The Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) Program must be updated to reflect this ineligibility.
Section 3(a), amending INA Section 214(s)(13)
State-Required Bonds and Compliance Incentives
This provision allows States to require State-sponsored nonimmigrants to pay a bond to incentivize compliance with program terms. Crucially, it mandates bonds of increasing amounts ($4,000 initially, rising by $1,000 annually) if more than 3% of a State's sponsored nonimmigrants violate terms (e.g., residing/working illegally outside the sponsoring State) in a fiscal year, as determined by the Inspector General of DHS or Comptroller General. Bonds are reimbursed upon departure, approval of lawful permanent residency, or death, with specific conditions for denial if terms are violated.
Section 3(a), amending INA Section 214(s)(18)
Numerical Limitations and Adjustments
This section establishes a complex formula for determining the total number of State-sponsored nonimmigrant visas available annually. Each participating State receives a base of 5,000 visas, plus a share of 245,000 visas (adjusted for non-participating states and unused/revoked visas) based on its population. The total number of visas is also adjusted annually based on the percentage increase or decrease in the U.S. Gross Domestic Product. Additionally, a State's allocation can increase by 10% for good compliance (<3% violations) or decrease by 50% for poor compliance (>3% violations), with a 5-year suspension for 4 consecutive years of poor compliance. These limits apply only to principal aliens, not their family members.
Section 3(a), amending INA Section 214(s)(19) and (20)
Waiver of Inadmissibility/Deportability for Certain Long-Term Undocumented Aliens
At a State's request, the Secretary can waive certain grounds of inadmissibility and deportability for aliens who were physically present in the U.S. on December 31, 2016, are sponsored by a State, and meet other W visa requirements. Applicants must provide evidence of presence/employment, pay a fee and a penalty ($1,000 minimum), and face criminal penalties for fraud. A fraud prevention program is mandated. Denied applicants are placed in removal proceedings, but employers providing records for these applications are protected from prosecution for prior unlawful employment, unless records are fraudulent.
This provision requires an alien to waive any right to judicial review or appeal of an immigration officer's admissibility determination at the port of entry, and any right to contest or appeal removal actions (other than asylum claims), as a condition for receiving State-sponsored nonimmigrant status.
Section 3(a), amending INA Section 214(s)(9)(C)
Why it matters:This is a common legislative tactic in immigration bills to streamline enforcement and limit judicial challenges, but it significantly curtails legal avenues for nonimmigrants.
Case for: Proponents argue that these waivers are necessary to ensure efficient processing and enforcement of immigration laws, preventing protracted legal battles that can clog the system and undermine the temporary nature of the nonimmigrant status.
Case against: Opponents contend that requiring such broad waivers of judicial review can undermine fundamental due process rights, potentially leaving nonimmigrants vulnerable to arbitrary decisions without adequate recourse.
Estimated impact: Significantly limits legal protections for all State-sponsored nonimmigrants.
This provision requires employers of State-sponsored nonimmigrants to pay an amount equivalent to the Federal tax on wages (under chapters 21 and 23 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, which cover FICA and FUTA) into the general fund of the Treasury, subject to the same penalties as failure to pay such tax.
Section 3(a), amending INA Section 214(s)(12)(C)
Why it matters:While a significant fiscal detail, it's presented as an accounting consideration related to benefits rather than a direct tax increase, potentially minimizing its perceived impact.
Case for: Proponents argue this ensures that employers of State-sponsored nonimmigrants contribute to federal programs (like Social Security and Medicare) in a manner equivalent to employers of U.S. workers, preventing an unfair advantage and ensuring the long-term solvency of these funds.
Case against: Critics might argue that this adds another layer of administrative complexity and cost for employers, potentially discouraging participation in the program, especially for small businesses.
Estimated impact: Generates significant federal revenue, equivalent to FICA/FUTA contributions for all W visa holders.
This provision allows for the waiver of certain inadmissibility and deportability grounds for aliens present in the U.S. since December 31, 2016, who are sponsored by a State. Crucially, it grants protection to employers who provide employment records for these aliens from civil or criminal prosecution under INA 274A (unlawful employment) or tax laws for the prior unlawful employment of such aliens, provided the records are not fraudulent.
Section 3(a), amending INA Section 214(s)(19) and (20)(G)
Why it matters:This is a significant incentive for employers to cooperate with the application process for their undocumented workers, but its placement might downplay its "amnesty-like" implications for past violations.
Case for: Proponents argue this protection is essential to encourage employers to come forward and provide necessary documentation, without which many eligible aliens would be unable to prove their presence and employment history. It facilitates the transition of workers from the informal to the formal economy.
Case against: Opponents might argue that this provision grants a form of retroactive immunity to employers who knowingly hired undocumented workers, potentially undermining enforcement efforts and creating a moral hazard.
Estimated impact: Facilitates applications for long-term undocumented residents and provides significant legal protection to employers.