Bill · H.R. 6608· House(119-HR-6608)
SHIELD Act of 2025
- Introduced
- 12/11/2025
- Last activity
- 12/11/2025 — Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Sponsored by
- Jodey Arrington
- Cosponsors
- - 10 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the "SHIELD Act of 2025," aims to prevent state or local governments from interfering with federal immigration enforcement. It prohibits federal financial assistance to any state or political subdivision that arrests, detains, or prosecures federal law enforcement officers performing immigration duties. It also covers those who otherwise obstruct or interfere with such officers. The Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security will determine if such conduct has occurred. If a jurisdiction is found to be in violation, it becomes ineligible for federal financial assistance for that fiscal year and subsequent years. These funds are then reallocated to jurisdictions that are not ineligible.
Yes
Does this give the federal government more power?+7
The bill expands federal authority by using the withholding of federal funds to prevent state and local interference with federal duties.
Does this tighten control of the border?+5
The bill protects federal immigration officers from local legal interference to ensure uninterrupted immigration enforcement.
The opposite· 3 of 4
Would immigrants be better off under this?-4
The bill strengthens federal immigration enforcement mechanisms that target immigrant populations.
Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this?-3
The bill facilitates more aggressive immigration enforcement which may disproportionately affect Hispanic communities.
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?-2
The bill may negatively impact low-income households if their local jurisdictions lose federal financial assistance due to the prohibition.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of Federal Officers: The bill aims to ensure that federal law enforcement officers acting within the scope of their duties are not subject to arrest, detention, or prosecution by state or local jurisdictions (Section 2).
-
Support for Immigration Enforcement: By preventing local interference, the act seeks to uphold the rule of law regarding the Federal Government's exclusive authority over immigration enforcement (Section 2).
-
Fund Reallocation: Any federal financial assistance that a state or local subdivision is ineligible to receive will be reallocated to states or political subdivisions that are not ineligible (Section 3(d)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Loss of Federal Financial Assistance: States or political subdivisions that arrest, detain, or prosecute federal law enforcement officers—or otherwise obstruct them—will be ineligible to receive federal financial assistance for that fiscal year and every year thereafter (Section 3(a) and 3(c)).
-
Strict Conditions for Restoring Funds: To get withheld federal financial assistance back, the Attorney General must certify that the offending entity has stopped the conduct and provided written assurances that the interference will not happen again (Section 4).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Immigrants-4Good For Hispanic Americans-3Good For Low Income Households-2
- Governance And Ideology
- Increases Federal Power+7
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Border Security+5
- Economy And Finance
- Reduces Government Spending-2
- 4/9/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/16/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/15/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/11/2025
- Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 7 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Don BaconRepublican · Nebraska
Tim BurchettRepublican · Tennessee
Michael CloudRepublican · Texas
Glenn GrothmanRepublican · Wisconsin
Clay HigginsRepublican · Louisiana
Anna Paulina LunaRepublican · Florida
Richard McCormickRepublican · Georgia
Troy NehlsRepublican · Texas
Keith SelfRepublican · Texas
Claudia TenneyRepublican · New York