A Republican bill with 12 Republican cosponsors · See all 12 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 "No Safe Haven for Terrorist Families Act" creates a new reason to deny entry or remove people from the United States based on their family ties. It targets close relatives of "covered foreign threat actors," which include designated terrorists, senior officials from state sponsors of terrorism or foreign adversaries, and sanctioned kleptocrats. These family members would be considered inadmissible and deportable. The bill requires the Secretary of State to revoke visas for these individuals within 30 days of a determination. It also removes most forms of discretionary relief from removal for those affected.
Yes· 3 of 5
- Scored +6
Does this tighten control of the border?
Increases border security by establishing new grounds for inadmissibility to prevent potential threats from entering.
- Scored +5
Does this give the federal government more power?
Increases the authority of the Secretary of State and DHS to revoke visas and deport individuals.
- Scored +4
Does this give the government more power to monitor people inside the country?
Requires enhanced screening and use of intelligence databases to identify family ties of threat actors.
The opposite· 3 of 6
- Scored -9
Would immigrants be better off under this?
Creates broad new grounds for inadmissibility and deportation based on family relationships.
- Scored -9
Does this make it easier for immigrants already here to become citizens?
Severely restricts pathways to legal status and removes discretionary relief for affected individuals.
- Scored -8
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
Removes most forms of discretionary relief from removal for affected individuals.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
National Security Protection: The bill aims to protect the national security of the United States by denying "safe haven" to people whose family ties to enemies of the U.S. are seen as unacceptable risks (Section 2).
-
Blocking Resource Networks: By restricting entry to close family members, the bill seeks to stop those who may share "access to networks, resources, and influence" that could harm the United States (Section 2).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Broad Family Restrictions: The bill labels a wide range of relatives as inadmissible, including spouses, former spouses, parents, parents-in-law, children, stepchildren, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, nieces, and nephews (Section 3(a)(2)(B)(i)).
-
Severe Legal Consequences: Individuals identified as covered family members are not only inadmissible but also deportable (Section 3(b)).
-
Loss of Legal Status: The Secretary of State must revoke any previously issued visas or documentation within 30 days once inadmissibility is determined (Section 4(a)).
-
Removal of Legal Options: Affected individuals are barred from seeking "cancellation of removal, adjustment of status, or any other form of discretionary relief" (Section 4(c)).
-
Retroactive Application: The rules apply regardless of when the family relationship started or when the threat actor was designated (Section 3(a)(2)(C)), and apply to people already admitted or granted lawful status in the U.S. (Section 7(2)(B)).
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? — Creates broad new grounds for inadmissibility and deportation based on family relationships. Would children be better off under this? — Children of threat actors are specifically listed as inadmissible and deportable regardless of their own actions.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases the authority of the Secretary of State and DHS to revoke visas and deport individuals. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires an annual report to Congress on the number of inadmissibilities and removals. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Removes most forms of discretionary relief from removal for affected individuals. Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — Increases screening using intelligence and law enforcement databases for family ties.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this give the government more power to monitor people inside the country? — Requires enhanced screening and use of intelligence databases to identify family ties of threat actors. Does this put more money into stopping terrorism? — Provides authorization for funds to enhance screening of foreign threat actor family members. Does this favour talking over confrontation abroad? — May strain relations with foreign adversaries and state sponsors of terrorism by targeting their family members.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this tighten control of the border? — Increases border security by establishing new grounds for inadmissibility to prevent potential threats from entering. Does this make it easier for immigrants already here to become citizens? — Severely restricts pathways to legal status and removes discretionary relief for affected individuals.
- 6/24/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 6/9/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 6/8/2026
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- 6/4/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 4 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.
Tim BurchettRepublican · Tennessee
Ben ClineRepublican · Virginia
Byron DonaldsRepublican · Florida
Russ FulcherRepublican · Idaho
Brandon GillRepublican · Texas
Wesley HuntRepublican · Texas
Abraham HamadehRepublican · Arizona
Anna Paulina LunaRepublican · Florida
John RoseRepublican · Tennessee
Elise StefanikRepublican · New York
Keith SelfRepublican · Texas
Beth Van DuyneRepublican · Texas