Rules Committee · Jun 5, 2025
H.Amdt. 27: Its purpose is not yet published.
Adopted
With no one objecting, no names recorded
A Republican bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
In the other chamber's committee
Passed one chamber and has been handed to a committee in the other.
The committee decides whether it goes any further, and most bills that reach a committee never leave it. A committee that simply does nothing kills a bill without anyone ever voting against it, so no news from here is usually the news.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House 211–199
- In Senate committee
What this bill would do
The Save SBA from Sanctuary Cities Act of 2025 directs the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to relocate certain offices. These offices, known as covered offices, must be moved if they are located in a sanctuary jurisdiction. The Administrator must first publicly determine if an office is in such a jurisdiction before ordering a move. Relocation must occur within 120 days of that public determination. The act also includes penalties for offices that fail to relocate on time.
Yes
- Scored +3
Does this give the federal government more power?
The act increases federal authority by mandating office relocations based on local jurisdiction policies.
The opposite· 3 of 5
- Scored -3
Would people in cities be better off under this?
Urban residents in sanctuary cities may face reduced access to SBA services due to office relocations.
- Scored -3
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
The relocation of SBA offices away from sanctuary jurisdictions may reduce local access to small business support services.
- Scored -3
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The bill restricts the autonomy of local jurisdictions by forcing federal offices to relocate due to their local policies.
What Congress actually voted on
2 recorded votes have been taken on this bill. One of them decided something; the rest moved it along.
- The House: the vote on whether to pass the bill This is the real decision in this chamber. Passing here sends the bill to the other chamber, which must pass it too before it can go to the President. Passed 211 yes · 199 no
06/05/2025 · Roll call 153 · recorded as “On Passage”
- The House: a last attempt to send the bill back to committee The minority party's final chance to change or stall a bill just before the vote on passage. It almost always fails; when it succeeds, the bill does not get its final vote that day. Motion to recommit rejected 202 yes · 210 no
06/05/2025 · Roll call 152 · recorded as “On Motion to Recommit”
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Office Relocation Requirements: The bill ensures that any covered office determined to be in a sanctuary jurisdiction is moved to a location that is not in a sanctuary jurisdiction (Section 2(a) and 2(c)).
-
Employee Reassignment: In the event a covered office fails to relocate within the 120-day period, employees are assigned to a duty station at another covered office that is in the same State and not in a sanctuary jurisdiction, or another office not in a sanctuary jurisdiction (Section 2(d)(2)(A)(ii)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Ceasing of Operations: If a covered office fails to relocate within the 120-day deadline, the office must cease operations (Section 2(d)(2)(A)(ii)(I)).
-
Removal of Office Heads: The Administrator is required to immediately remove the head of a covered office if they fail to submit a written explanation for a missed relocation deadline or if the Administrator deems their explanation insufficient (Section 2(d)(2)(B)).
-
Restrictions on New Offices: The Administrator is prohibited from establishing any new covered offices within a sanctuary jurisdiction (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 people in cities be better off under this? — Urban residents in sanctuary cities may face reduced access to SBA services due to office relocations. Would business owners be better off under this? — Local businesses in sanctuary jurisdictions may lose the economic activity provided by SBA offices.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The relocation of SBA offices away from sanctuary jurisdictions may reduce local access to small business support services. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — Relocating offices and potential cessation of operations may result in shifting or reducing operational costs.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The act increases federal authority by mandating office relocations based on local jurisdiction policies. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill restricts the autonomy of local jurisdictions by forcing federal offices to relocate due to their local policies.
- 6/9/2025
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
- 6/5/2025
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 211 - 199 (Roll no. 153). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H2483)
- On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 211 - 199 (Roll no. 153). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H2483)
- On motion to recommit Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 202 - 210 (Roll no. 152).
- Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2492-2493)
- POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 2931, the Chair put the question on motion to recommit and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Cisneros demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
- The previous question on the motion to recommit was ordered pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX.
- Mr. Cisneros moved to recommit to the Committee on Small Business. (text: CR H2488)
- The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 2931.
- Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2483, H.R. 2931, H.R. 2966 and H.R. 2987. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 2483 under a structured rule and for consideration of H.R. 2931, H.R. 2966, and H.R. 2987 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.
- Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 458. (consideration: CR H2483-2489)
- 6/3/2025
- Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 458 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2483, H.R. 2931, H.R. 2966 and H.R. 2987. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 2483 under a structured rule and for consideration of H.R. 2931, H.R. 2966, and H.R. 2987 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.
- 5/21/2025
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Small Business. H. Rept. 119-110.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 81.
- 4/30/2025
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 15 - 11.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/17/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Small Business.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Nick LaLotaRepublican · New York