H.R.3882 - Reimbursements for Immigration Partnerships with Police to allow Local Enforcement Act of 2025; RIPPLE Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.3882, also known as the RIPPLE Act of 2025, proposes to amend Section 287(g)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The amendment would allow the Attorney General to reimburse states and local political subdivisions for the costs of salaries and overtime pay for state employees performing immigration functions under existing agreements. This includes wages and overtime compensation for officers or employees performing these functions.
Expected Effects
If enacted, the RIPPLE Act would provide federal funding to states and localities that have agreements with the federal government to enforce immigration laws. This could lead to increased state and local involvement in immigration enforcement. It may also incentivize more states and localities to enter into such agreements.
Potential Benefits
- Increased immigration enforcement at the state and local level.
- Potential reduction in the financial burden on states and localities for immigration enforcement.
- Improved cooperation between federal and state/local authorities on immigration matters.
- Possible deterrence of illegal immigration due to increased enforcement.
- Could free up federal resources by leveraging state and local 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 budgets if federal reimbursements are insufficient or delayed.
- Erosion of trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement.
- Potential for the creation of a dual system of justice, where immigrants are treated differently.
- Possible legal challenges based on constitutional grounds.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutional alignment is complex. Article I, Section 8 grants Congress the power to establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization. The Tenth Amendment reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states, potentially raising questions about the extent to which the federal government can direct state law enforcement activities. The Fourth Amendment's protections against unreasonable searches and seizures could also be implicated if state and local enforcement leads to increased profiling or discriminatory practices.
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).