RepublicanBill · H.Res. 50· House(119-HRES-50)

Recognizing that article I, section 10 of the United States Constitution explicitly reserves to the States the sovereign power to repel an invasion and defend their citizenry from the overwhelming and "imminent danger" posed by paramilitary, narco-terrorist cartels, terrorists and criminal actors who seized control of our southern border.

Rep. Arrington
Age: 54 years
Texas
Introduced
1/16/2025
Last activity
1/16/2025 — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsored by
Jodey Arrington
Cosponsors
Republican - 41Democrat - 0
Immigration
  1. Introduced
  2. In Committee

A House resolution is the House speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the House agrees to it, it is officially the House's word; it is not a law, so the Senate and the President have no part in it.

What this bill would do

This resolution recognizes that Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution gives states the sovereign power to repel an invasion and defend their citizens. It states that paramilitary narco-terrorist cartels, terrorists, and criminal actors have seized control of the southern border. The text highlights that from 2021 through 2024, the southern border states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California were invaded or faced imminent danger. It declares that the United States and the Biden administration failed to protect these states against invasion and failed to faithfully execute the laws. Finally, the resolution finds that any state has the sovereign right to exclude persons who do not have the right to be in the sovereign's territory.

Yes· 3 of 5

  • Does this leave more decisions to the states?+9

    The resolution strongly emphasizes the sovereign right of states to defend themselves against perceived invasions.

  • Does this tighten control of the border?+8

    The resolution asserts state authority to defend against border incursions and manage illegal immigration.

  • Would people in rural areas be better off under this?+5

    The bill mentions benefits to ranchers and protection for border-state residents.

The opposite· 3 of 4

  • Would immigrants be better off under this?-8

    The resolution focuses on the exclusion and repression of illegal immigrants.

  • Does this give the federal government more power?-7

    The resolution seeks to limit federal oversight by asserting state sovereign power over the border.

  • Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this?-5

    The resolution targets illegal immigration which disproportionately involves Hispanic populations.