A Democratic bill with 32 Democratic cosponsors · See all 32 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 Fairness to Freedom Act of 2025 aims to establish a right to government-funded legal counsel for individuals facing removal or other immigration proceedings. It mandates that any person financially unable to obtain representation is entitled to legal assistance at government expense. To manage this, the bill creates the Office of Immigration Representation as a private nonprofit corporation to ensure high-quality legal services. This Office would oversee various regional local boards and different types of immigration defenders. The Act also sets specific standards for advocacy, continuous representation, and access to legal documents. Finally, it provides a funding mechanism based on a ratio relative to federal immigration enforcement and prosecution spending.
Yes· 3 of 10
- Scored +9
Would immigrants be better off under this?
The bill guarantees a fundamental right to legal counsel and support services for those facing removal or exclusion.
- Scored +8
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The bill specifically targets individuals who are financially unable to afford legal representation.
- Scored +7
Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this?
The bill provides essential legal resources to a demographic that is heavily represented in immigration proceedings.
The opposite
- Scored -5
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
The bill mandates significant new government spending to fund legal counsel and support services for immigrants.
- Scored -2
Does this tighten control of the border?
The bill focuses on providing legal rights to individuals rather than increasing physical or technological border control.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Guaranteed Legal Counsel: Individuals facing removal, exclusion, or deportation who cannot afford a lawyer will be entitled to representation at government expense (Section 101(a)).
-
Protection Against Public Charge Determinations: Seeking or receiving appointed counsel cannot be used as a reason to determine that an individual is likely to become a public charge (Section 102).
-
Timely Access to Information: Counsel and their clients will automatically receive complete copies of their immigration files and relevant government documents to assist in their defense (Section 101(d)(3)).
-
Continuous Representation: The bill ensures representation continues through all stages of a proceeding, including appeals to Federal courts and the Supreme Court (Section 101(c)(4)).
-
Support Services: Legal representation can include necessary services such as interpretation, translation, and other services needed for effective representation (Section 101(c)(2)).
-
Increased Access for Detained Individuals: The right to counsel attaches as soon as a person is taken into custody by the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Health and Human Services (Section 101(c)(3)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Mandatory Pause of Proceedings: If a proceeding has already started without counsel being appointed, the proceeding must be paused until counsel is provided (Section 101(d)(1)).
-
Strict Waiver Requirements: An individual can only waive their right to appointed counsel if they do so in the physical presence of appointed counsel and demonstrate they have the intelligence and knowledge to conduct their own defense (Section 101(e)(2)).
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 guarantees a fundamental right to legal counsel and support services for those facing removal or exclusion. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill specifically targets individuals who are financially unable to afford legal representation. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides essential legal resources to a demographic that is heavily represented in immigration proceedings. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides legal protections for immigrants regardless of their specific ethnic background. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides legal protections that may benefit various minority populations subject to immigration enforcement.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — By providing legal counsel to immigrants, the bill helps protect the rights of diverse populations often subject to removal proceedings. Does this make it easier for immigrants already here to become citizens? — Guaranteed legal counsel can help individuals navigate and successfully complete processes related to their legal status. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Providing free legal services reduces the financial burden on low-income individuals facing immigration proceedings. Does this tighten control of the border? — The bill focuses on providing legal rights to individuals rather than increasing physical or technological border control.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires the Office to submit annual and seven-year reports to Congress and the President regarding its operations and outcomes.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill establishes a new Office of Immigration Representation and various local boards which will require many legal and administrative employees. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The bill mandates significant new government spending to fund legal counsel and support services for immigrants.
- 11/11/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 11/10/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 11/2/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/29/2026
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- 10/26/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 10/22/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 10/19/2026
- 6 Cosponsors added.
- 8/13/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/27/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/10/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 11/4/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/6/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/18/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 9/17/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/23/2025
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- 5/20/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/30/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 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.
Becca BalintDemocrat · Vermont
Yvette ClarkeDemocrat · New York
Judy ChuDemocrat · California
Jasmine CrockettDemocrat · Texas
Greg CasarDemocrat · Texas
Diana DeGetteDemocrat · Colorado
Adriano EspaillatDemocrat · New York
Jesús GarcíaDemocrat · Illinois
Sylvia GarciaDemocrat · Texas
Robert GarciaDemocrat · California
Daniel GoldmanDemocrat · New York
Jared HuffmanDemocrat · California
Henry JohnsonDemocrat · Georgia
Pramila JayapalDemocrat · Washington
Sara JacobsDemocrat · California
Stephen LynchDemocrat · Massachusetts
Summer LeeDemocrat · Pennsylvania
James McGovernDemocrat · Massachusetts
Grace MengDemocrat · New York
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Ilhan OmarDemocrat · Minnesota
Mike QuigleyDemocrat · Illinois
Delia RamirezDemocrat · Illinois
Janice SchakowskyDemocrat · Illinois
Mary Gay ScanlonDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Andrea SalinasDemocrat · Oregon
Lateefah SimonDemocrat · California
Rashida TlaibDemocrat · Michigan
Jill TokudaDemocrat · Hawaii
Shri ThanedarDemocrat · Michigan
Nydia VelázquezDemocrat · New York
Juan VargasDemocrat · California