H.R.1927 - Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal Act of 2025; CLEAR Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.1927, the CLEAR Act of 2025, aims to enhance federal, state, and local cooperation in enforcing immigration laws. It seeks to reaffirm state authority in immigration enforcement, encourage state cooperation by linking it to federal funding, and improve information sharing regarding immigration violators. The bill also proposes increased federal detention space and training for state and local law enforcement personnel.
Expected Effects
If enacted, the CLEAR Act would likely lead to increased involvement of state and local law enforcement in federal immigration enforcement. This could result in more apprehensions and removals of aliens unlawfully present in the United States. The reallocation of funds based on cooperation with federal immigration enforcement could incentivize states to adopt stricter immigration policies.
Potential Benefits
- Enhanced public safety through the removal of criminal aliens.
- Increased cooperation between federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.
- Improved information sharing regarding immigration violators.
- Potential reduction in the financial burden on states for incarcerating unlawfully present aliens through federal reimbursement.
- Standardized training for state and local law enforcement on immigration law enforcement.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential for increased racial profiling and discrimination by state and local law enforcement.
- Strain on state and local resources due to increased involvement in immigration enforcement.
- Possible erosion of trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement.
- Concerns about the constitutionality of certain provisions, particularly those related to state authority and federal overreach.
- Financial burden on the federal government to construct and maintain additional detention facilities.
Constitutional Alignment
The CLEAR Act raises several constitutional concerns. Section 3, affirming inherent state authority in immigration enforcement, could be challenged under the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Clause 2), which holds that federal law is supreme to state law. The Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures could be implicated by increased state and local enforcement of immigration laws. Additionally, the Tenth Amendment, reserving powers not delegated to the federal government to the states, could be invoked to argue against federal mandates imposed on states through funding conditions.
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).