Written by Selwyn Duke
#twill #tcot #progressive #socialism #marxism #maga #
What would you say about legislation requiring the government to use tax money to transport convicted criminal illegal aliens who’d already been deported back to the United States, calling it the “right to come home”?
What if that bill also created a situation in which a known Mexican drug cartel leader could be released from prison, enter the United States “illegally,” and it would no longer be a crime? Such radical and self-destructive legislation has already been proposed.
It’s called the New Way Forward Act (H.R. 5383), and it goes way beyond Hillary Clinton’s 2013 call for a “hemispheric common market” with “open borders,” according to commentator Tucker Carlson. In fact, it would be the coup de grâce to our already balkanized country, reflecting a radical new Democratic Party that views our nation as “a rogue state, in which everything must be destroyed and remade: our laws, our institutions, our freedoms, our history and our values,” as Carlson put it on last night’s edition of his Fox News show.
This is no exaggeration. Introduced by Democratic Representatives Jesús “Chuy” Garcia (Ill.), Pramila Jayapal (Wa.), Karen Bass (Calif.), and Ayanna Pressley (Mass.) in December 2019, the New Way Forward Act (NWFA), shockingly, is supported by almost one-fifth of House Democrats, including Representatives Ilhan Omar (Minn.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.).
ULINE Shipping SuppliesHuge Catalog! Over 31,000 Products. Same Day Shipping from 11 Locationswww.ULINE.com
Just as shockingly, this nation-rending bill has received virtually no media attention, tragic as it “would entirely remake our immigration system, with the explicit purpose of ensuring that criminals are able to move here, and settle here permanently, with impunity,” Carlson also relates.
The commentator calls the NWFA “the most radical single piece of legislation we’ve [ever] seen,” making the Green New Deal, and proposals to end fracking via executive order and nationalize healthcare seem sane by comparison. The bill’s promotional materials actually state, “Convictions … should not lead to deportation” Carlson reports.
Targeted are serious convictions, too — felonies bringing years in prison. Currently, “legal U.S. immigrants can be deported if they commit an ‘aggravated felony’ or a ‘crime of moral turpitude’ — that is, a vile, depraved act, like molesting a child,” explained Carlson. Yet under the NWFA, “‘crimes of moral turpitude’ are eliminated entirely as a justification for deportation. And the category of ‘aggravated felony’ gets circumscribed too” (video below).
The NWFA also would, according to Carlson,
• end automatic deportation for all crimes, including robbery, fraud, and child sexual abuse;
• make aliens who falsify passports immune from deportation, period;
• raise the minimum sentence triggering deportation, for crimes that still require it, from one to five years. Note that “crimes like car theft, fraud, and weapons offenses all carry average prison sentences of fewer than five years,” informs Carlson. Moreover, some rapists, child abusers, and even killers receive less time than that. Yet aliens thus convicted would stay in our country and eventually receive citizenship;
• allow anti-American immigration judges to nullify deportation orders even for aliens with five-year-plus sentences;
• allow drug addicts and those convicted of drug crimes abroad to immigrate to the U.S;
• decriminalize illegal entry, even for the previously deported. The NWFA asserts that “criminalizing illegal entry … is ‘white supremacist,’” relates Carlson; and
• effectively abolish all enforcement against illegal migration.
In summary, it would be much harder arresting illegals than arresting you. “They’re the protected class here. You’re just some loser who’s paying for it all,” laments Carlson.
As for the aforementioned “right to come home,” it would include tens of thousands of aliens expelled from our country for manifold crimes: “Sexual abuse. Robbery. Assault. Drug trafficking, weapons trafficking, human trafficking,” Carlson further reports.
In fact, from “2002 to 2018, 480,000 people were deported for illegal entry or reentry into America,” Carlson continues. The NWFA would force us to buy them all plane tickets back here — costing approximately a billion dollars — “and that’s before Democrats make you start paying for these criminals’ free health care, too. Which they plan to,” Carlson adds.
It’s not surprising the mainstream media have suppressed this story. It reveals, right before an election and in stark terms, the new Democratic Party’s face: radical, anti-American, angry, and bent on our nation’s destruction.
Of course, as with most all of today’s illegal and legal immigrants, the vast majority of these “new Americans” would vote Democratic. That’s the whole idea, too: The Left wants an “entirely new country, in which resistance is crushed, and they’re in charge forever,” Carlson concludes.
The NWFA won’t likely pass and be signed into law anytime soon. But know that this is precisely what the Democrats’ ascendant AOC/Sanders wing — which will one day control the whole party — has in store for us. They are the Enemy Within.
| Sponsor: | Rep. Garcia, Jesus G. “Chuy” [D-IL-4] (Introduced 12/10/2019) |
|---|---|
| Committees: | House – Judiciary |
| Latest Action: | House – 01/30/2020 Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship. (All Actions) |
Tracker:
This bill has the status Introduced
Here are the steps for Status of Legislation:
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To President
- Became Law
Subject — Policy Area:
- Immigration
Text: H.R.5383 — 116th Congress (2019-2020)All Information (Except Text)
There is one version of the bill.
Text available as:
Shown Here:
Introduced in House (12/10/2019)
| 116th CONGRESS 1st Session |
H. R. 5383
To reform the process for enforcing the immigration laws of the United States, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESDecember 10, 2019
Mr. García of Illinois (for himself, Ms. Jayapal, Ms. Bass, Ms. Pressley, Mr. Grijalva, Ms. Velázquez, Ms. Haaland, Ms. Tlaib, Ms. Escobar, Ms. Omar, Ms. Garcia of Texas, Mr. Espaillat, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, Ms. Judy Chu of California, Mr. Danny K. Davis of Illinois, Ms. Lee of California, Mr. Rush, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Takano, Ms. Barragán, Mr. McGovern, Ms. Meng, Mrs. Napolitano, Ms. Schakowsky, Ms. Wilson of Florida, Mr. Serrano, Ms. Clarke of New York, Ms. Norton, Mrs. Watson Coleman, Mr. Vargas, Mr. Cárdenas, Mr. Brown of Maryland, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Mr. Correa, and Mr. Meeks) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To reform the process for enforcing the immigration laws of the United States, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the “New Way Forward Act”.TITLE I—END MANDATORY DETENTION AND REQUIRE PROBABLE CAUSE FOR ARREST
SEC. 101. PHASE-OUT OF PRIVATE FOR-PROFIT DETENTION FACILITIES AND USE OF JAILS.
(a) Secure Detention Facilities.—Beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security may not enter into, or extend, any contract with any public or private for-profit entity that owns or operates a detention facility for use of that facility to detain aliens in the custody of the Department of Homeland Security, and shall terminate any such contract not later than the date that is 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. Beginning on the date that is 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, any facility at which aliens in the custody of the Department of Homeland Security are detained shall be owned and operated by the Department of Homeland Security.
(b) Non-Secure Detention Programs.—Beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security may not enter into, or extend, any contract with any public or private for-profit entity that owns or operates a program or facility that provides for non-residential detention-related activities for aliens who are subject to monitoring by the Department of Homeland Security, and shall terminate any such contact not later than the date that is 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. Beginning on the date that is 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, any such program or facility shall be owned and operated by a nonprofit organization or by the Department of Homeland Security.
(c) Publication Of Plan.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall develop, and make publicly available, a plan and timeline for the implementation of this section.
SEC. 102. PROCEDURES FOR DETAINING ALIENS.
(a) Custody And Bond Determinations.—Section 236 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1226) is amended—
(1) by striking subsections (a) through (c) and inserting the following:
“(a) Arrest, Detention, And Release.—
“(1) IN GENERAL.—On a warrant issued by an immigration judge, or pursuant to section 287(a)(2), the Secretary of Homeland Security may arrest an alien and, in accordance with this section, may, pending a decision on whether the alien is to be removed from the United States—
“(A) detain the alien; or
“(B) release the alien—
“(i) on bond;
“(ii) subject to conditions; or
“(iii) on the alien’s own recognizance.
“(2) EXCEPTION.—This section shall not apply to an unaccompanied alien child (as defined in section 462(g)(2) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 279(g)(2))). Such an alien shall be transferred to the custody of the Secretary of Health and Human Services pursuant to section 235(b)(3) of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (8 U.S.C. 1232(b)(3)).
“(b) Custody And Bond Determinations.—
“(1) INITIAL DETERMINATION.—Not later than 48 hours after taking an alien into custody, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall make an initial custody determination with regard to that alien, and provide that determination in writing to the alien. If the Secretary determines that the release without conditions of an alien will not reasonably assure the appearance of the alien as required or will endanger the safety of any other person or the community, the custody determination under this paragraph will impose the least restrictive conditions, as described in paragraph (4).
“(2) TIMING.—If an alien seeks to challenge the initial custody determination under paragraph (1), the alien shall be provided with the opportunity for a hearing before an immigration judge to determine whether the alien should be detained, which hearing shall occur not later than 72 hours after the initial custody determination, except that an immigration judge may grant a reasonable continuance upon the alien’s request for additional time to prepare for the hearing.
“(3) PRESUMPTION OF RELEASE.—In a hearing under this subsection, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the alien should be released. The Government shall have the duty of rebutting this presumption by clear and convincing evidence based on credible and individualized information that establishes that the use of alternatives to detention will not reasonably assure the appearance of the alien at removal proceedings, or that the alien is a threat to another person or the community. The fact that an alien has a prior conviction or a criminal charge pending against the alien may not be the sole factor to justify the continued detention of the alien.
“(4) LEAST RESTRICTIVE CONDITIONS REQUIRED.—If an immigration judge determines pursuant to a hearing under this section that the release without conditions of an alien will not reasonably assure the appearance of the alien as required or will endanger the safety of any other person or the community, the immigration judge shall order the least restrictive conditions, or combination of conditions, that the judge determines will reasonably assure the appearance of the alien as required and the safety of any other person and the community, which may include secured or unsecured release on bond, or participation in a program described in subsection (i). Any conditions assigned to an alien pursuant to this paragraph shall be reviewed by the immigration judge on a monthly basis.
“(5) BOND DETERMINATION.—In the case that an immigration judge makes a determination to release an alien on bond under subsection (a)(1)(B)(i), the immigration judge shall consider, for purposes of setting the amount of the bond, the alien’s financial resources and ability to pay the bond without imposing financial hardship on the alien.
“(6) SPECIAL RULE FOR VULNERABLE PERSONS AND PRIMARY CAREGIVERS.—In a case in which an alien who is the subject of a custody determination under this subsection is a vulnerable person or a primary caregiver, the alien may not be detained unless the Government shows, in addition to the requirements under paragraph (3), that it is unreasonable or not practicable to place the individual in a community-based supervision program.
“(7) DEFINITION.—In this subsection, the term ‘vulnerable person’ means an individual who—
“(A) is under 21 years of age or over 60 years of age;
“(B) is pregnant;
“(C) identifies as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or intersex;
“(D) is victim or witness of a crime;
“(E) has filed a nonfrivolous civil rights claim in Federal or State court;
“(F) has a serious mental or physical illness or disability;
“(G) has been determined by an asylum officer in an interview conducted under section 235(b)(1)(B) to have a credible fear of persecution or a reasonable fear of persecution under section 208.31 or 241.8(e) of title 8, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of the enactment of the New Way Forward Act);
“(H) has limited English language proficiency and is not provided access to appropriate and meaningful language services in a timely fashion; or
“(I) has been determined by an immigration judge or the Secretary of Homeland Security to be experiencing severe trauma or to be a survivor of torture or gender-based violence, based on information obtained during intake, from the alien’s attorney or legal service provider, or through credible self-reporting.
“(c) Subsequent Determinations.—An alien who is detained under this section shall be provided with a de novo custody determination hearing under this subsection every 60 days, as well as upon showing of a change in circumstances or good cause for a de novo custody determination hearing.”; and
(2) by striking subsection (e) and inserting the following:
“(e) Release Upon An Order Granting Relief From Removal.—In the case of an alien with respect to whom an immigration judge has entered an order terminating removal proceedings or an order providing for relief from removal, including an order granting asylum, or providing for withholding, deferral, or cancellation of removal, which order is pending appeal, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall immediately release the alien upon entry of the order, and may impose only reasonable conditions on the alien’s release from custody.
“(f) Alternatives To Detention.—
“(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish programs that provide alternatives to detaining aliens, which shall offer a continuum of supervision mechanisms and options, including community-based supervision programs and community support. The Secretary may contract with nongovernmental community-based organizations to provide programs, which may include case management services, appearance assistance services, and screenings of aliens who have been detained.
“(2) INDIVIDUALIZED DETERMINATION REQUIRED.—In determining whether to order an alien to participate in a program under this subsection, the Secretary, or the immigration judge, as appropriate shall make an individualized determination to determine the appropriate level of supervision for the alien. Participation in a program under this subsection may not be ordered for an alien for whom it is determined that release on reasonable bond or recognizance will reasonably assure the appearance of the alien as required and the safety of any other person and the community.”.
(b) Probable Cause Hearing.—Section 287(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1357(a)) is amended by striking the matter preceding paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
“(a) Any officer or employee of the Department of Homeland Security authorized under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Homeland Security shall have power without warrant—
“(1) to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to the person’s right to be or to remain in the United States, provided that such interrogation is not based on the person’s race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, color, spoken language, or English language proficiency; and
“(2) to arrest any alien who in the officer or employee’s presence or view is entering or attempting to enter the United States in violation of any law or regulation made in pursuance of law regulating the admission, exclusion, expulsion, or removal of aliens, or to arrest any alien in the United States, if—
“(A) the officer or employee has probable cause to believe that the alien so arrested is in the United States in violation of any such law or regulation and is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest;
“(B) the officer or employee has reason to believe that the person would knowingly and willfully fail to appear in immigration court in response to a properly served notice to appear; and
“(C) not later than 48 hours after being taken into custody, the arrested alien is provided with a hearing before an immigration judge to determine whether there is probable cause as required by this section, including probable cause to believe that the person would have knowingly and willfully failed to appear as required under subparagraph (B), which burden to establish probable cause shall be on the Government.”.
(c) Mandatory Detention Repealed.—The Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) is amended—
(1) in section 235(b)(1)(B)(ii)—
(A) by striking “shall” and inserting “may”; and
(B) by inserting before the period at the end the following: “pursuant to the custody review procedures set forth in section 236”;
(2) by striking section 235(b)(1)(B)(iii)(IV);
(3) in section 235(b)(2)(A)—
(A) by striking “shall” and inserting “may”; and
(B) by inserting before the period at the end the following: “pursuant to the custody review procedures set forth in section 236”;
(4) by striking section 236A;
(5) in section 238(a)(2), by striking “pursuant to section 236(c)”; and
(6) in section 506(a)(2)—
(A) by striking the paragraph heading and inserting the following: “RELEASE HEARING FOR ALIENS DETAINED”; and
(B) in subparagraph (A)—
(i) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking “lawfully admitted for permanent residence”;
(ii) by striking clause (i); and
(iii) by redesignating clauses (ii) and (iii) as clauses (i) and (ii), respectively.
(d) Aliens Ordered Removed.—Section 241(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(a)) is amended—
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking “90 days” each place it appears and inserting “60 days”;
(2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
“(2) INITIAL CUSTODY REDETERMINATION HEARING.—
“(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 72 hours after the entry of a final administrative order of removal, the alien ordered removed shall be provided with a custody redetermination hearing before an immigration judge.
“(B) PRESUMPTION OF DETENTION.—For purposes of the hearing under subparagraph (A), the alien shall be detained during the removal period unless the alien can show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the alien’s removal is not reasonably foreseeable and that the alien does not pose a risk to the safety of any individual or to the community.”;
(3) in paragraph (3)—
(A) in the paragraph heading, by striking “90-DAY” and inserting “60-DAY”; and
(B) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking “the alien, pending removal, shall be subject to supervision under” and inserting the following: “except as provided in paragraph (7), any alien who has been detained during the removal period shall be released from custody, pending removal, subject to individualized supervision requirements in accordance with”;
(4) by striking paragraph (6); and
(5) by striking paragraph (7) and inserting the following:
“(7) SUBSEQUENT CUSTODY REDETERMINATION HEARINGS.—
“(A) IN GENERAL.—The Government may request a subsequent redetermination hearing before an immigration judge seeking continued detention for an alien ordered to be detained pursuant to paragraph (2) who has not been removed within the removal period.
“(B) STANDARD.—An alien may only be detained after the removal period upon a showing by the Government that—
“(i) the alien’s removal is reasonably foreseeable; and
“(ii) the alien poses a risk to the safety of an individual or the community, which may only be established based on credible and individualized information that establishes objective risk factors, and may not be established based only on the fact that the alien has been charged with or is suspected of a crime.
“(C) PERIOD OF DETENTION.—An alien may not be detained pursuant to an order under this paragraph for longer than a 60-day period. The Government may seek subsequent redetermination hearings under this paragraph in order to continue detaining an alien beyond each such 60-day period.”.TITLE II—STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
SEC. 201. TIME FOR COMMENCING REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS.
Section 239(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229(d)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
“(3)(A) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), any removal proceeding against an alien previously admitted to the United States for being within a class of deportable aliens described in section 237(a)(2), or within a class of inadmissible aliens described in section 212(a)(2), shall not be entertained unless commenced not later than the date that is five years after the date on which the alien became deportable or inadmissible.
“(B) This paragraph shall apply to any removal proceeding resulting in an order of removal before the date of the enactment of the New Way Forward Act as if in effect on the date on which the removal proceeding was commenced.”.TITLE III—LIMIT CRIMINAL-SYSTEM-TO-REMOVAL PIPELINE
SEC. 301. CRIMINAL OFFENSES AND IMMIGRATION LAWS.
(a) Inadmissibility Based On Criminal And Related Grounds.—Section 212(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)) is amended—
(1) by striking subparagraph (A); and
(2) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) through (I) as subparagraphs (A) through (H), respectively.
(b) Deportability Based On Criminal Offenses.—Section 237(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)) is amended—
(1) in subparagraph (A)—
(A) by striking clauses (i) and (ii);
(B) by redesignating clauses (iii) through (vi) as clauses (i) through (iv), respectively; and
(C) in clause (iv), as so redesignated, by striking “Clauses (i), (ii), and (iii)” and inserting “Clauses (i) and (ii)”;
(2) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(3) by redesignating subparagraphs (C) through (F) as subparagraphs (B) through (E), respectively.
SEC. 302. DEFINITIONS.
(a) Aggravated Felony.—Section 101(a)(43) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)) is amended—
(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking “means—” and inserting “means a felony, for which a term of imprisonment of not less than 5 years was imposed, that is—”;
(2) in subparagraph (F), by striking “for which the term of imprisonment at least one year”;
(3) in subparagraph (G), by striking “for which” and all that follows through “year”;
(4) in subparagraph (J), by striking “, for which a sentence of one year imprisonment or more may be imposed”;
(5) in subparagraph (P)—
(A) by striking “(i)”; and
(B) by striking “and (ii) for which the term of imprisonment imposed (regardless of any suspension of such imprisonment) is at least 12 months”;
(6) in subparagraph (R), by striking “for which the term of imprisonment is at least one year”;
(7) in subparagraph (S), by striking “, for which the term of imprisonment is at least one year”; and
(8) by striking the last sentence.
(b) Conviction.—Section 101(a)(48) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(48)) is amended—
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking “court” and all that follows through “to be imposed.” and inserting the following: “court. An adjudication or judgment of guilt that has been dismissed, expunged, sealed, deferred, annulled, invalidated, withheld, or vacated, or where a court has issued a judicial recommendation against removal, or an order of probation without entry of judgment or any similar disposition, shall not be considered a conviction for purposes of this Act. No judgment on appeal or within the time to file direct appeal shall be deemed a ‘conviction’ for the purposes of this Act.”; and
(2) in subparagraph (B)—
(A) by inserting “only” after “deemed to include”; and
(B) by striking “or confinement” and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting “ordered by a court of law. Any such reference shall not be deemed to include any suspension of the imposition or execution of that imprisonment or sentence in whole or in part.”.
(c) Particularly Serious Crime.—Section 208(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1158)(b)(2)(B)(i)) is amended to read as follows:
“(i) CONVICTION OF AGGRAVATED FELONY.—For purposes of clause (ii) of subparagraph (A), section 241(b)(3)(B), or any other provision of this Act, only an alien who has been convicted of an aggravated felony for which a term of imprisonment of not less than five years was imposed shall be considered to have been convicted of a particularly serious crime.”.
(d) Applicability.—The amendments made by this section shall apply to—
(1) admissions and conduct occurring before, on, or after the date of the enactment of this Act; and
(2) convictions and sentences entered before, on, or after the date of the enactment of this Act.TITLE IV—RESTORE JUDICIAL DISCRETION AND END REMOVAL WITHOUT DUE PROCESS
SEC. 401. IMMIGRATION PROCEDURAL CHANGES.
(a) Decision And Burden Of Proof.—Section 240(c)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229(c)(1)(A)) is amended by inserting after the period at the end the following: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an immigration judge may grant any relief or deferral from removal, including withholding of removal, to any individual who is otherwise eligible for such relief but for a prior criminal conviction, or the commission of or a finding of the commission of other conduct described in section 212(a)(2), 237(a)(2), or 237(a)(3), if the immigration judge finds such an exercise of discretion appropriate in pursuit of humanitarian purposes, to assure family unity, or when it is otherwise in the public interest.”.
(b) Removal Of Aliens Who Are Not Permanent Residents.—Section 238 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1228) is amended—
(1) by striking subsection (b); and
(2) by redesignating the first subsection (c) as subsection (b).
(c) Reinstatement Of Removal Orders Against Aliens Illegally Reentering.—Section 241(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(a)) is amended—
(1) by striking paragraph (5); and
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (6) and (7) as paragraphs (5) and (6), respectively.
(d) Special Rules Relating To Continuous Residence Or Physical Presence.—Section 240A(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.1229b(d)) is amended—
(1) by striking paragraph (1);
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively.
(e) Judicial Review Of Orders Of Removal.—Section 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1252) is amended by striking subsection (a)(2)(C).TITLE V—PROHIBITION AGAINST PERFORMANCE OF IMMIGRATION OFFICER FUNCTIONS BY STATE AND LOCAL OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES
SEC. 501. LOCAL ENFORCEMENT.
(a) In General.—Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.1357(g)) is amended to read as follows:
“(g)(1) The officers and employees of any State, or any political subdivision of a State, are prohibited from performing the function of an immigration officer in relation to the investigation, apprehension, transport, or detention of aliens in the United States or otherwise assist in the performance of such functions.
“(2) Civil immigration warrants shall not be made available to the officers or employees of any State, or any political subdivision of a State, through the National Crime Information Center database or its incorporated criminal history databases. Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials are prohibited from entering into the National Crime Information Center database or its incorporated criminal history databases information that relates to an alien’s immigration status, the existence of a prior removal, deportation, or voluntary departure order entered against an alien, or any allegations of civil violations of the immigration laws. Any information described in this paragraph that is in the National Crime Information Center database shall be removed from such database not later than 90 days after the enactment of the New Way Forward Act”..”.
(b) Prohibiting Coordination For Enforcement Of Immigration Laws.—
(1) PROHIBITING STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ARREST AND DETENTION OF ALIENS.—Section 439 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1252c) is repealed.
(2) COMMUNICATION.—Section 434 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1644) is repealed.
(c) Communication And Enforcement.—Section 642 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1373) is repealed.
SEC. 502. NATIONAL CRIME INFORMATION CENTER.
Section 534(f) of title 28, United States Code, is amended—
(1) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
“(3) Civil immigration warrants shall not be made available to the officers or employees of any State, or any political subdivision of a State, through the National Crime Information Center database or its incorporated criminal history databases. Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials are prohibited from entering into the National Crime Information Center database or its incorporated criminal history databases information that relates to an alien’s immigration status, the existence of a prior removal, deportation, or voluntary departure order entered against an alien, or any allegations of civil violations of the immigration laws. Any information described in this paragraph that is in the National Crime Information Center database shall be removed from such database not later than 90 days after the enactment of the New Way Forward Act”..”.TITLE VI—DECRIMINALIZE MIGRATION
SEC. 601. REPEALING MIGRATION CRIMINAL LAWS.
(a) Criminal Penalties For Entry At Improper Time Or Place.—Section 275 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1325) is repealed.
(b) Criminal Penalties For Reentry.—Section 276 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1326) is repealed.TITLE VII—RIGHT TO COME HOME
SEC. 701. RECONSIDERING AND REOPENING IMMIGRATION CASES.
(a) In General.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Attorney General—
(1) shall grant a motion to reconsider or reopen proceedings pursuant to paragraph (6) or (7) of section 240(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)) with respect to any alien who—
(A) on or after April 24, 1996—
(i) was ordered removed, deported, or excluded; or
(ii) departed the United States pursuant to a grant of voluntary departure under section 240B of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229c) (regardless of whether or not the alien was ordered removed, deported, or excluded); and
(B) demonstrates that the alien—
(i) would not have been considered inadmissible, excludable, or deportable under the immigration laws (as defined in section 101(a)(17) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(17))) if this Act, and the amendments made by this Act, had been in effect on the date on which such order was issued or the voluntary departure took place; or
(ii) would have been eligible to apply for relief from removal, deportation, or exclusion under such laws if this Act, and the amendments made by this Act, had been in effect on the date on which such order was issued or the voluntary departure took place; and
(2) shall deem an alien who makes the demonstration under paragraph (1)(B) as not having been removed, deported, excluded, or departed, and as not having failed to depart under a voluntary departure order, for all purposes under the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.).
(b) Previously Filed Application; Previous Motions To Reopen Or Reconsider.—The Attorney General may not reject or deny a motion to reconsider or reopen under subsection (a) because—
(1) the alien did not include a copy of any previously filed application for relief; or
(2) the alien had previously filed a motion to reopen or reconsider.
(c) Deadline.—The deadline described in paragraphs (6)(B) and (7)(C)(i) of section 240(c) of the Immigrations and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)) shall not apply to a motion to reopen or reconsider under this section.
(d) Transportation.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide transportation for aliens eligible for reopening or reconsideration of their proceedings under this section, at Government expense, to return to the United States for further immigration proceedings and shall admit or parole the alien into the United States.
(e) Physical Presence Requirement.—For the purpose of applications filed subsequent to reopening under this section pursuant to section 240A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229b), or any other application for relief under the immigration laws (as defined in section 101(a)(17) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(17))), removal, deportation, exclusion, or voluntary departure shall not be considered to toll any physical presence requirement.
(f) Judicial Review.—Notwithstanding any other provision of the Immigration and National Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), any denial of a motion to reopen or reconsider submitted pursuant to this section is subject to de novo judicial review in a Federal district court having jurisdiction over the applicant’s residence or, in the case of an applicant who was removed from the United States, the last known residential address of the applicant in the United States.
