Full bill text rendering is coming soon.
In the meantime, read the full text on Congress.gov ↗.
Implementation & Enforcement Top 5
Exclusionary remedy for unlawful immigration enforcement
Creates a statutory exclusionary rule barring evidence obtained through violations of the judicial warrant requirement from being used in removal proceedings to establish alienage, and grants noncitizens the right to move for termination of removal proceedings on that basis. Prohibits Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers from arresting or detaining any individual without a judicially enforceable warrant issued by a magistrate judge or Senate-confirmed Article III judge, overriding existing immigration law and DHS regulations that permit administrative warrants, and bars administrative warrants from authorizing or justifying entry into private residences except for individuals deemed flight risks or dangers to the public.
- Population Scope Medium The judicial warrant requirement and exclusionary rule apply to all individuals subject to ICE and CBP arrest or detention, a population that spans millions of noncitizens present in the U.S. — a share approaching or exceeding 10% of the total U.S. population when accounting for the undocumented and visa-holding populations.
- Budgetary Magnitude Low No funds are authorized or appropriated; the provision imposes procedural and legal constraints on enforcement operations rather than creating spending obligations.
- Legal / Regulatory Depth High Overrides existing immigration law and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) regulations by imposing a judicial warrant requirement where administrative warrants currently suffice, and creates a new statutory exclusionary rule and termination-motion right in removal proceedings — substantive changes to both enforcement authority and individual procedural entitlements.
- Degree of Discretion Granted Low Mandatory 'shall not' prohibitions govern ICE and CBP arrest authority with only a narrow exception for flight risks or public dangers, leaving officers minimal discretion to deviate from the warrant requirement.
- Implementation & Enforcement Burden High Requires case-by-case judicial warrant procurement before every arrest or detention and creates a new class of suppression motions in removal proceedings, substantially increasing adjudicatory load on immigration courts and the Executive Office for Immigration Review.
- Temporal Commitment High Persists indefinitely until Congress acts to repeal or amend it.
No signal yet
Regulatory or Legal Changes Top 5
Restrictions on converting facilities into immigration detention centers
Bars Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) from converting warehouses, state-run facilities, or correctional facilities into immigration detention centers unless the converted facility fully complies with federal detention and safety standards, provides access to counsel and family, passes an independent pre-operational inspection, grants unrestricted unannounced access to state attorneys general and oversight monitors, and receives advance notice and intergovernmental consultation with state and local officials. Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to ensure all immigration detention center contracts include enforceable financial clawback and liquidated damages provisions triggered by persistent or systemic failure to meet applicable federal standards.
- Population Scope Low Directly affects ICE, CBP, private contractors, and state and local governments in jurisdictions where facility conversions are contemplated — a narrow set of entities, not a broad share of the U.S. population.
- Budgetary Magnitude Medium Mandates enforceable financial clawback and liquidated damages provisions in all detention contracts, creating recurring fiscal exposure and potential recovery obligations tied to federal detention spending without a fixed dollar authorization.
- Legal / Regulatory Depth High Establishes a new statutory prohibition on facility conversion absent full pre-operational compliance, creating binding constraints on executive agency authority that did not previously exist and distributing oversight power to non-federal actors including state attorneys general.
- Degree of Discretion Granted Low The conversion bar and compliance prerequisites are mandatory, leaving Department of Homeland Security (DHS) no discretion to proceed without satisfying all listed conditions; contractual clawback inclusion is similarly non-discretionary.
- Implementation & Enforcement Burden High Requires standing up new pre-operational inspection infrastructure, intergovernmental coordination processes, and contractual enforcement mechanisms before any converted facility may open, creating substantial recurring administrative load.
- Temporal Commitment High Same as above.
No signal yet
Regulatory or Legal Changes Top 5
Civil rights and access protections for detained individuals
Prohibits excessive force during immigration enforcement operations and guarantees detained individuals timely family notification, phone access, legal counsel, faith leader access, accommodations for signing legal documents, and ongoing medical and mental health care — including access to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care for detained veterans — in accordance with National Detention Standards. Establishes mandatory standards for transferring detained individuals between immigration detention facilities, including written pre-transfer justification, 24-hour notice to counsel and family, medical transfer summaries, specialty care continuity protections, attestation of bed availability and federal standards compliance, and minimum transport safety conditions covering seatbelts, ventilation, food and water, bathroom access, and prohibition on breathing-impeding restraints.
- Population Scope Low Directly affects individuals held in immigration detention, a population numbering in the hundreds of thousands at any given time — well under 1% of the U.S. population.
- Budgetary Magnitude Low No funds are authorized or appropriated; the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care access provision creates a new service obligation on existing VA appropriations, but the detained-veteran population is very small, making the marginal fiscal impact minimal.
- Legal / Regulatory Depth High Creates a comprehensive set of new statutory entitlements — enforceable rights to family notification, counsel, medical care, and prescribed transfer procedures — that override agency discretion and establish binding federal duties where none previously existed as universal statutory obligations.
- Degree of Discretion Granted Low Obligations are cast in mandatory 'shall' language throughout, leaving Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with little discretion over whether to comply, only narrow operational latitude on timing and logistics.
- Implementation & Enforcement Burden High Imposes an affirmative, ongoing compliance obligation across every immigration detention facility, requiring case-by-case adherence to individualized procedural duties — notification timelines, transfer justifications, medical screenings — for each detainee.
- Temporal Commitment High Same as above.
No signal yet
Regulatory or Legal Changes Top 5
Congressional access to immigration detention facilities
Requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to ensure all Members of Congress have unrestricted, unannounced access to all immigration detention facilities — including privately operated ones — covering all facility areas, private conversations with detainees and staff, and the ability to bring staff and subject matter experts, while prohibiting delays, conditions, or denials of such access and mandating 72-hour reporting to congressional committees of any denial. Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to pursue administrative or contractual disciplinary action against officers, employees, or contractors who knowingly deny congressional access to immigration detention facilities on two or more occasions in a single fiscal year. Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to track and publicly report aggregated allegations and incidents of misconduct by immigration enforcement officers, including excessive force, wrongful detention of U.S. citizens, and sexual assault. Requires all immigration detention facilities to maintain a confidential, multilingual, and accessible grievance process through which detained individuals may report excessive force, legal violations, threats, and sexual misconduct, with accompanying accountability measures including disciplinary action against officers found to have used excessive force.
- Population Scope Low Directly regulates a narrow set of actors: Members of Congress, immigration detention facility operators and staff, and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) personnel — a small fraction of the U.S. population.
- Budgetary Magnitude Low No funds are authorized or appropriated; compliance costs arise from administrative implementation but no dollar amounts are specified or obligated.
- Legal / Regulatory Depth High Creates new statutory mandates — an enforceable right of congressional access to all detention facilities, a prohibition on denial, new misconduct-reporting duties, and a grievance infrastructure with binding disciplinary consequences — substantively restructuring oversight authority over federal and private detention operations.
- Degree of Discretion Granted Low Predominantly uses mandatory 'shall' language throughout, leaving DHS little discretion in granting access, reporting misconduct, or pursuing disciplinary action against violators.
- Implementation & Enforcement Burden Medium Imposes recurring compliance obligations — 72-hour denial reports to six congressional committees, ongoing aggregated public misconduct reporting, multilingual grievance infrastructure, and disciplinary proceedings — requiring standing administrative capacity across all DHS-affiliated detention facilities.
- Temporal Commitment High Same as above.
No signal yet
Carve-outs, Exemptions, Eligibility Top 5
Exceptions
The restrictions set forth in paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to an individual who is determined to be a flight risk or a danger to the public.
- Population Scope Low Applies only to a subset of individuals subject to immigration enforcement who are affirmatively determined to be flight risks or dangers to the public — a narrow subpopulation within an already small enforcement-contact population.
- Budgetary Magnitude Low No funds are authorized, appropriated, or obligated; this is a narrow carve-out from a prohibition with no fiscal consequence of its own.
- Legal / Regulatory Depth Low Preserves existing enforcement discretion for a defined exception class rather than creating new substantive law, limiting its legal effect to constraining the scope of the adjacent prohibition.
- Degree of Discretion Granted Medium The flight-risk or public-danger determination is left to officer or agency judgment without defined criteria, granting meaningful operational discretion within the exception.
- Implementation & Enforcement Burden Low Creates no new enforcement mechanism or compliance obligation; it relieves officers of a procedural duty in a defined circumstance rather than adding administrative load.
- Temporal Commitment High Same as above.
No signal yet
No possible riders have been surfaced for this bill.
Summary
The OPEN Act (Oversight, Protection, and Enforcement Notification Act) sets new federal rules governing how the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its immigration enforcement components — including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) — operate immigration detention facilities and conduct enforcement actions. Among other elements, the bill * requires all Members of Congress to have unrestricted, unannounced access to immigration detention facilities; * mandates public reporting of immigration enforcement officer misconduct, including excessive force and wrongful detention; * establishes civil rights protections for detained individuals, including access to counsel, family notification, medical care, and transfer standards; * restricts conversion of warehouses and other facilities into detention centers without compliance with federal standards and oversight requirements; * requires ICE and CBP to obtain judicially enforceable warrants before arresting or detaining individuals; * and creates an exclusionary remedy barring evidence obtained in violation of the warrant requirement from use in removal proceedings.
AI-generated summary, pending human review.
| Version | Event | Date | User support | Your vote | Roll calls |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Original |
Initial publication
May 29, 2026
|
May 29, 2026 | No votes yet | — | — |
Log in or create an account to record your vote on this legislation. Results are visible to all visitors.
Implementation & Enforcement Top 5
Exclusionary remedy for unlawful immigration enforcement
Creates a statutory exclusionary rule barring evidence obtained through violations of the judicial warrant requirement from being used in removal proceedings to establish alienage, and grants noncitizens the right to move for termination of removal proceedings on that basis. Prohibits Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers from arresting or detaining any individual without a judicially enforceable warrant issued by a magistrate judge or Senate-confirmed Article III judge, overriding existing immigration law and DHS regulations that permit administrative warrants, and bars administrative warrants from authorizing or justifying entry into private residences except for individuals deemed flight risks or dangers to the public.
- Population Scope Medium The judicial warrant requirement and exclusionary rule apply to all individuals subject to ICE and CBP arrest or detention, a population that spans millions of noncitizens present in the U.S. — a share approaching or exceeding 10% of the total U.S. population when accounting for the undocumented and visa-holding populations.
- Budgetary Magnitude Low No funds are authorized or appropriated; the provision imposes procedural and legal constraints on enforcement operations rather than creating spending obligations.
- Legal / Regulatory Depth High Overrides existing immigration law and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) regulations by imposing a judicial warrant requirement where administrative warrants currently suffice, and creates a new statutory exclusionary rule and termination-motion right in removal proceedings — substantive changes to both enforcement authority and individual procedural entitlements.
- Degree of Discretion Granted Low Mandatory 'shall not' prohibitions govern ICE and CBP arrest authority with only a narrow exception for flight risks or public dangers, leaving officers minimal discretion to deviate from the warrant requirement.
- Implementation & Enforcement Burden High Requires case-by-case judicial warrant procurement before every arrest or detention and creates a new class of suppression motions in removal proceedings, substantially increasing adjudicatory load on immigration courts and the Executive Office for Immigration Review.
- Temporal Commitment High Persists indefinitely until Congress acts to repeal or amend it.
No signal yet
Implementation & Enforcement
Exclusionary remedy for unlawful immigration enforcement
Regulatory or Legal Changes Top 5
Restrictions on converting facilities into immigration detention centers
Bars Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) from converting warehouses, state-run facilities, or correctional facilities into immigration detention centers unless the converted facility fully complies with federal detention and safety standards, provides access to counsel and family, passes an independent pre-operational inspection, grants unrestricted unannounced access to state attorneys general and oversight monitors, and receives advance notice and intergovernmental consultation with state and local officials. Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to ensure all immigration detention center contracts include enforceable financial clawback and liquidated damages provisions triggered by persistent or systemic failure to meet applicable federal standards.
- Population Scope Low Directly affects ICE, CBP, private contractors, and state and local governments in jurisdictions where facility conversions are contemplated — a narrow set of entities, not a broad share of the U.S. population.
- Budgetary Magnitude Medium Mandates enforceable financial clawback and liquidated damages provisions in all detention contracts, creating recurring fiscal exposure and potential recovery obligations tied to federal detention spending without a fixed dollar authorization.
- Legal / Regulatory Depth High Establishes a new statutory prohibition on facility conversion absent full pre-operational compliance, creating binding constraints on executive agency authority that did not previously exist and distributing oversight power to non-federal actors including state attorneys general.
- Degree of Discretion Granted Low The conversion bar and compliance prerequisites are mandatory, leaving Department of Homeland Security (DHS) no discretion to proceed without satisfying all listed conditions; contractual clawback inclusion is similarly non-discretionary.
- Implementation & Enforcement Burden High Requires standing up new pre-operational inspection infrastructure, intergovernmental coordination processes, and contractual enforcement mechanisms before any converted facility may open, creating substantial recurring administrative load.
- Temporal Commitment High Same as above.
No signal yet
Regulatory or Legal Changes
Restrictions on converting facilities into immigration detention centers
Regulatory or Legal Changes Top 5
Civil rights and access protections for detained individuals
Prohibits excessive force during immigration enforcement operations and guarantees detained individuals timely family notification, phone access, legal counsel, faith leader access, accommodations for signing legal documents, and ongoing medical and mental health care — including access to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care for detained veterans — in accordance with National Detention Standards. Establishes mandatory standards for transferring detained individuals between immigration detention facilities, including written pre-transfer justification, 24-hour notice to counsel and family, medical transfer summaries, specialty care continuity protections, attestation of bed availability and federal standards compliance, and minimum transport safety conditions covering seatbelts, ventilation, food and water, bathroom access, and prohibition on breathing-impeding restraints.
- Population Scope Low Directly affects individuals held in immigration detention, a population numbering in the hundreds of thousands at any given time — well under 1% of the U.S. population.
- Budgetary Magnitude Low No funds are authorized or appropriated; the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care access provision creates a new service obligation on existing VA appropriations, but the detained-veteran population is very small, making the marginal fiscal impact minimal.
- Legal / Regulatory Depth High Creates a comprehensive set of new statutory entitlements — enforceable rights to family notification, counsel, medical care, and prescribed transfer procedures — that override agency discretion and establish binding federal duties where none previously existed as universal statutory obligations.
- Degree of Discretion Granted Low Obligations are cast in mandatory 'shall' language throughout, leaving Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with little discretion over whether to comply, only narrow operational latitude on timing and logistics.
- Implementation & Enforcement Burden High Imposes an affirmative, ongoing compliance obligation across every immigration detention facility, requiring case-by-case adherence to individualized procedural duties — notification timelines, transfer justifications, medical screenings — for each detainee.
- Temporal Commitment High Same as above.
No signal yet
Regulatory or Legal Changes
Civil rights and access protections for detained individuals
Regulatory or Legal Changes Top 5
Congressional access to immigration detention facilities
Requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to ensure all Members of Congress have unrestricted, unannounced access to all immigration detention facilities — including privately operated ones — covering all facility areas, private conversations with detainees and staff, and the ability to bring staff and subject matter experts, while prohibiting delays, conditions, or denials of such access and mandating 72-hour reporting to congressional committees of any denial. Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to pursue administrative or contractual disciplinary action against officers, employees, or contractors who knowingly deny congressional access to immigration detention facilities on two or more occasions in a single fiscal year. Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to track and publicly report aggregated allegations and incidents of misconduct by immigration enforcement officers, including excessive force, wrongful detention of U.S. citizens, and sexual assault. Requires all immigration detention facilities to maintain a confidential, multilingual, and accessible grievance process through which detained individuals may report excessive force, legal violations, threats, and sexual misconduct, with accompanying accountability measures including disciplinary action against officers found to have used excessive force.
- Population Scope Low Directly regulates a narrow set of actors: Members of Congress, immigration detention facility operators and staff, and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) personnel — a small fraction of the U.S. population.
- Budgetary Magnitude Low No funds are authorized or appropriated; compliance costs arise from administrative implementation but no dollar amounts are specified or obligated.
- Legal / Regulatory Depth High Creates new statutory mandates — an enforceable right of congressional access to all detention facilities, a prohibition on denial, new misconduct-reporting duties, and a grievance infrastructure with binding disciplinary consequences — substantively restructuring oversight authority over federal and private detention operations.
- Degree of Discretion Granted Low Predominantly uses mandatory 'shall' language throughout, leaving DHS little discretion in granting access, reporting misconduct, or pursuing disciplinary action against violators.
- Implementation & Enforcement Burden Medium Imposes recurring compliance obligations — 72-hour denial reports to six congressional committees, ongoing aggregated public misconduct reporting, multilingual grievance infrastructure, and disciplinary proceedings — requiring standing administrative capacity across all DHS-affiliated detention facilities.
- Temporal Commitment High Same as above.
No signal yet
Regulatory or Legal Changes
Congressional access to immigration detention facilities
Carve-outs, Exemptions, Eligibility Top 5
Exceptions
The restrictions set forth in paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to an individual who is determined to be a flight risk or a danger to the public.
- Population Scope Low Applies only to a subset of individuals subject to immigration enforcement who are affirmatively determined to be flight risks or dangers to the public — a narrow subpopulation within an already small enforcement-contact population.
- Budgetary Magnitude Low No funds are authorized, appropriated, or obligated; this is a narrow carve-out from a prohibition with no fiscal consequence of its own.
- Legal / Regulatory Depth Low Preserves existing enforcement discretion for a defined exception class rather than creating new substantive law, limiting its legal effect to constraining the scope of the adjacent prohibition.
- Degree of Discretion Granted Medium The flight-risk or public-danger determination is left to officer or agency judgment without defined criteria, granting meaningful operational discretion within the exception.
- Implementation & Enforcement Burden Low Creates no new enforcement mechanism or compliance obligation; it relieves officers of a procedural duty in a defined circumstance rather than adding administrative load.
- Temporal Commitment High Same as above.
No signal yet
Carve-outs, Exemptions, Eligibility
Exceptions
Incomplete vote
You have not made a selection on all required items:
Choose Neutral if you prefer not to commit. Leaving without completing will remove all your votes for this bill from the totals.
Maximum recommendations reached
You have already recommended the maximum number of components allowed on this bill. To recommend [new component], choose one of your current recommendations to unselect: