HB 1399 would create a new criminal offense in Indiana for “unlawful presence in Indiana by an alien.” Under the bill, a person defined as an “alien” under federal immigration law who is unlawfully present in the United States and is physically present in Indiana would commit a Class A misdemeanor. The bill incorporates federal definitions and references federal immigration provisions to determine who is covered.
The bill also creates an exception for certain individuals described in 18 U.S.C. 922(y)(2), which generally relates to specified categories of noncitizens exempted from federal firearm restrictions. The proposed chapter would be added to the Indiana Code as IC 35-46-11 and would take effect July 1, 2025.
Impact
HB 1399 would add a new chapter to Indiana’s criminal code and expand state law by making unlawful immigration status, combined with presence in Indiana, a state misdemeanor offense. It would give state authorities a new basis to charge certain noncitizens under Indiana law, while relying on federal immigration definitions and status determinations to identify who is covered. The bill would affect noncitizens who are unlawfully present in the United States, as well as law enforcement and prosecutors responsible for enforcing the new offense.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of committee testimony or recorded votes in the provided materials, the available context suggests the bill was introduced as a straightforward enforcement measure with no documented debate in the record provided. The caption indicates a focus on illegal immigration, and the bill’s structure suggests support from sponsors for creating a state-level penalty. However, because no committee discussion or vote history is included, there is no direct evidence here of broader support or opposition.
Contention
The main point of contention likely concerns whether Indiana should create a state crime tied to federal immigration status, which raises questions about state authority, federal preemption, and enforcement practicality. Critics would likely focus on the use of immigration status as a criminal trigger and the potential for overlap with federal law, while supporters would likely argue that the bill strengthens state enforcement against unlawful presence. No specific objections or named opponents are included in the provided materials.