H.R. 3725

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3725 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 3725

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to reform the process for 
granting parole, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

June 4, 2025

Mr. McDowell (for himself, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. Moore of West 
Virginia, Ms. Boebert, Mr. Norman, Mr. Hamadeh of Arizona, Mr. 
Grothman, Ms. Foxx, Mr. Langworthy, Mr. LaMalfa, Mr. Goldman of Texas, 
Mr. Taylor, Mr. Wied, Mr. Moore of North Carolina, Mr. McGuire, and Mr. 
Yakym) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

A BILL

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to reform the process for 
granting parole, 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 ``Preventing the Abuse of Immigration 
Parole Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:
(1) The use of parole under immigration law, under the 
discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security, is intended 
and should only be granted on a ``case-by-case'' basis, 
strictly evaluating each individual applicant's urgent 
humanitarian need or his or her significant public benefit.
(2) Under the Biden Administration, Secretary Mayorkas 
abused this program, paroling an estimated total of 2.8 million 
aliens into the United States, bypassing lawful visa and 
refugee processes.
(3) In its 2021 ruling in Texas v. Biden, the United States 
Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that Secretary Mayorkas' 
parole of inadmissible aliens ``en masse is the opposite of 
case-by-case decision making'' and these actions led to 
``misenforcement, suspension of the Immigration Nationality 
Act, or both''.
(4) The systemic abuse of parole for aliens outside the 
United States is a threat to national security and future abuse 
should be prevented.

SEC. 3. IMMIGRATION PAROLE REFORM.

Section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1182(d)(5)) is amended to read as follows:
``(5)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security may, except as provided 
in subparagraph (B) or in section 214(f), in his discretion parole into 
the United States temporarily under such conditions as he may prescribe 
only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or 
significant public benefit any alien applying for admission to the 
United States, but such parole of such alien shall not be regarded as 
an admission of the alien and when the purposes of such parole shall, 
in the opinion of the Secretary of Homeland Security, have been served 
the alien shall forthwith return or be returned to the custody from 
which he was paroled and thereafter his case shall continue to be dealt 
with in the same manner as that of any other applicant for admission to 
the United States.
``(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security may not parole into the 
United States any alien who is a national of a country of concern (as 
defined in section 1(m) of the State Department Basic Authorities Act 
of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2651a(m))) unless the Secretary of State issues a 
waiver with respect to the alien.
``(C) Beginning in fiscal year 2029, the total number of aliens 
granted parole pursuant to subparagraph (A) in each fiscal year shall 
not exceed 3,000.
``(D) The attorney general of a State, or other authorized State 
officer, alleging a violation of the limitation under subparagraph (A) 
that parole solely be granted on a case-by-case basis and solely for 
urgent humanitarian reasons or a significant public benefit, that harms 
such State or its residents shall have standing to bring an action 
against the Secretary of Homeland Security on behalf of such State or 
the residents of such State in an appropriate district court of the 
United States to obtain appropriate injunctive relief. The court shall 
advance on the docket and expedite the disposition of a civil action 
filed under this subparagraph to the greatest extent practicable. For 
purposes of this subparagraph, a State or its residents shall be 
considered to have been harmed if the State or its residents experience 
harm, including financial harm in excess of $100.''.
<all>