H.R.2708 - Safeguarding American Property Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.2708, the Safeguarding American Property Act of 2025, proposes amendments to Section 236(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The bill aims to expand the categories of property crimes that would trigger mandatory detention of criminal aliens. Specifically, it adds 'trespassing, vandalism, arson' to the list of offenses that necessitate detention pending immigration proceedings.
Expected Effects
The bill's likely effect is an increase in the detention of aliens who have committed property crimes. This could lead to more individuals being held in detention facilities while awaiting immigration hearings. It may also deter some aliens from committing such crimes.
Potential Benefits
- Increased public safety through the detention of aliens who commit property crimes.
- Potential reduction in property crime rates due to the deterrent effect of mandatory detention.
- Alignment with the goal of securing domestic tranquility as stated in the Constitution's preamble.
- Addresses concerns related to aliens committing crimes while awaiting immigration hearings.
- May lead to more efficient deportation processes for aliens convicted of these crimes.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential for increased costs associated with detaining a larger number of individuals.
- Possible strain on detention facilities and resources.
- Risk of detaining individuals who are later found not guilty of the alleged crimes.
- Concerns about due process and potential for unfair treatment of aliens.
- May negatively impact community relations and create distrust between law enforcement and immigrant communities.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutionality hinges on whether the detention of aliens who commit property crimes aligns with due process and equal protection principles. While the federal government has broad authority over immigration matters, the Fifth Amendment guarantees due process to all persons, including aliens, within the United States. The expansion of mandatory detention categories could be challenged if it is deemed to violate these rights. The bill does not appear to infringe upon any other specific constitutional provision, such as those related to free speech, religion, or the right to bear arms.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).