Bill · S. 157· Senate(119-S-157)
CONTAINER Act
- Introduced
- 1/21/2025
- Last activity
- 1/21/2025 — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
- Sponsored by
- Marsha Blackburn
- Cosponsors
- - 10 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The CONTAINER Act authorizes certain Border States to place movable, temporary structures on Federal land to secure the northern or southern international borders. Under this bill, a Border State does not need to obtain a special use authorization if they provide notice to the Secretary concerned at least 45 days before placement. These structures can be placed on land managed by agencies like the Bureau of Land Management or the National Park Service. The initial period for these structures is limited to no more than one year. Extensions can be granted in 90-day increments if the Secretary concerned approves. Approval for an extension is required if the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection determines that operational control has not been achieved.
Yes
Does this tighten control of the border?+7
The bill provides a mechanism for states to rapidly deploy structures to achieve operational control of the borders.
Does this leave more decisions to the states?+5
The bill empowers Border States to take direct action on federal land for border security provided they give advance notice.
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?+2
The bill facilitates rapid security actions in rural border areas where federal land is often managed.
The opposite
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?-3
The bill allows for the placement of structures on federal lands managed by agencies like the National Park Service without the standard special use authorization process.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Border Security Efficiency: The bill allows Border States to place movable, temporary structures on Federal land to secure the northern or southern border without needing a special use authorization (Section 2(b)). This is a way to secure the international border more rapidly.
-
Streamlined Process for Border States: By removing the requirement for a special use authorization, the bill provides a faster way for states to act, provided they give 45 days' notice to the Secretary concerned (Section 2(b)).
-
Clear Protocol for Extended Security: The bill establishes a specific mechanism where extensions for these structures can be granted in 90-day increments to maintain security if operational control has not been achieved (Section 2(c)(2)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Temporary Nature of Security Measures: The bill limits the initial placement of movable, temporary structures to a period of not more than 1 year (Section 2(c)(1)). This means the security measures are not permanent and are subject to a renewal process.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Border Security+7
- Governance And Ideology
- Increase States Rights+5
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Improves Environmental Protections-3
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Rural Residents+2
- 2/12/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/11/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/24/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/23/2025
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- 1/21/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
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.
Ted BuddRepublican · North Carolina
John CornynRepublican · Texas
Bill CassidyRepublican · Louisiana
Kevin CramerRepublican · North Dakota
Ted CruzRepublican · Texas
John HoevenRepublican · North Dakota
Cindy Hyde-SmithRepublican · Mississippi
Markwayne MullinRepublican · Oklahoma
Bernie MorenoRepublican · Ohio
Mike RoundsRepublican · South Dakota