Ritchie Torres (D-NY)
Families Deserve to Know Act
A Democratic bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The "Families Deserve to Know Act" requires U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to implement specific policies for notifying next-of-kin or emergency contacts regarding an individual's death, serious illness, or serious injury while in custody. It mandates the collection of emergency contact information, including preferences for faith leaders and medical proxies. The bill establishes strict notification timeframes, requiring death notifications within 12 hours and serious injury notifications as soon as practicable. It also dictates standards for compassionate notification, the handling of remains, and the provision of medical information. Furthermore, the Act imposes civil penalties on contractors and provides a private right of action for aggrieved families.
Yes
- Scored +8
Would immigrants be better off under this?
The bill protects the rights of individuals in ICE custody and their families through timely notifications.
- Scored +7
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
The bill enhances due process by providing families with legal recourse and mandatory notification timelines.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Timely Information for Families: The bill establishes strict timelines for notifications, such as notifying next-of-kin of a death within 12 hours (Section 2(c)(1)(A)) or of a serious injury/illness within 12 to 24 hours depending on the circumstances (Section 2(c)(1)(B)). This ensures families are not left in the dark during emergencies.
-
Respect for Personal Preferences: Individuals in custody can specify if they want a faith leader involved in the notification process and provide preferences for the order of contact notification (Section 2(b)(1)).
-
Medical Decision-Making Support: The Act allows individuals to provide information regarding medical proxies, advance directives, or do not resuscitate orders, ensuring their medical wishes are addressed during serious medical events (Section s 2(b)(1)(D) and Section 2(c)(8)(A)).
-
Language and Accessibility: To ensure people understand the process, the bill requires that all requests, forms, and disclosures be provided in a language the individual understands, with interpretation services provided as a necessity (Section 2(b)(3)).
-
Accountability for Facilities: The bill creates high stakes for detention facilities by requiring that any contract or service agreement include compliance with this Act as a material term, with failure resulting in civil penalties or contract termination (Section 3(b)(2)).
-
Legal Redress for Families: The Act provides a way for families to seek justice through civil actions, allowing them to sue for actual or statutory damages of at least $100,000 if a required notification is not made (Section 6(a) and Section 6(b)(1)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Restrictions on Information Sharing: A notification may be delayed if the Secretary of Homeland Security determines it presents a threat to public safety, interferes with a criminal investigation, or places the individual at risk of serious harm (Section 2(e)).
-
Limits on Information in Voicemails: The bill establishes that there are certain types of information that cannot be included in a voicemail, which may impact how information is relayed if a live conversation cannot occur (Section s 2(c)(4)(A)).
-
No Guarantee of Immediate Information: While the bill sets many timeframes, it also allows for the possibility that a notification may be delayed under specific determined circumstances (Section 2(e)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would immigrants be better off under this? — The bill protects the rights of individuals in ICE custody and their families through timely notifications.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill enhances due process by providing families with legal recourse and mandatory notification timelines.
- 9/2/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/13/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
Pablo HernándezDemocrat · Puerto Rico
George LatimerDemocrat · New York