HB4711, titled the “Rapid Expulsion of Migrant Offenders who Violate and Evade Act” or the “REMOVE Act,” would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to speed up removal proceedings for certain noncitizens. It directs the Attorney General to begin removal proceedings as soon as possible after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement files a Notice to Appear that has been served, and to begin proceedings as expeditiously as possible after conviction when the person has been convicted of a deportable offense.
The bill also requires the Attorney General to take all necessary actions, including issuing regulations and guidance, so that immigration court proceedings for these covered individuals are completed within 15 days of commencement. The measure is framed as a timing and process mandate rather than a change to the underlying grounds of removability, and it would override other provisions of law to the extent necessary to meet the 15-day completion requirement.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would significantly alter federal immigration procedure by imposing strict deadlines on the initiation and completion of removal proceedings for certain aliens, especially those convicted of deportable offenses. It would affect the Department of Justice, the Attorney General, immigration courts, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement by requiring faster case processing, new regulations or guidance, and potentially major operational changes to current docketing and adjudication practices under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Sentiment
The available record suggests support within the bill’s sponsoring coalition and committee majority, as reflected by the committee vote to order the bill reported on a 14-9 party-line margin. No transcript excerpts are available, but the bill’s title and structure indicate a strong enforcement-oriented approach, likely appealing to members favoring expedited removal of noncitizens with criminal convictions. The recorded vote suggests the measure was controversial and met resistance from committee members opposed to compressing immigration proceedings into such a short timeframe.
Contention
The main point of contention is the bill’s 15-day completion requirement, which critics are likely to view as unrealistic for due process, case preparation, evidence gathering, and access to counsel, while supporters likely argue it is necessary to prevent delay and ensure swift removal of deportable offenders. Another likely dispute is the bill’s broad override of other legal provisions, including existing asylum-related timing rules, which could raise concerns about fairness and administrative feasibility. The recorded 14-9 committee vote indicates partisan disagreement over whether expedited enforcement should take precedence over procedural safeguards.