District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act of 2025
Click any stage to learn more about the legislative process.
Would prohibit the District of Columbia from maintaining any law, policy, or practice that limits DC government cooperation with federal immigration enforcement — barring both information-sharing restrictions and refusals to honor DHS detainer or release-notification requests.
The bill targets so-called sanctuary policies in DC, compelling the District to share immigration-status data with other governments and to hold or notify authorities about individuals at DHS's request under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
What this bill would do
What it would do
The bill would prohibit DC from having in effect any statute, ordinance, policy, or practice that restricts DC government entities or officials from sharing information about an individual's citizenship or immigration status — lawful or unlawful — with any federal, state, or local government entity. It would also bar DC from limiting compliance with lawful DHS requests made under sections 236 or 287 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which authorize DHS to issue detainers asking jurisdictions to hold an individual for up to 48 hours after the person would otherwise be released, and to notify DHS of upcoming releases.
The bill operates as a federal preemption of DC's local sanctuary-type policies. It does not directly regulate private individuals or employers, and it does not expand DHS's underlying detention or enforcement authority — those powers remain as defined in the Immigration and Nationality Act. The bill does not include any enforcement mechanism or penalty clause in the text passed by the House.
Key provisions
- 1Would prohibit DC from having any law, ordinance, policy, or practice that bars DC officials from sharing individual citizenship or immigration status information with any government entity.
- 2Would prohibit DC from having any law, ordinance, policy, or practice that restricts compliance with lawful DHS detainer requests or release-notification requests under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Who would be affected
DC government agencies, officials, and law enforcement personnel who currently operate under DC sanctuary-type policies limiting their cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Individuals held in DC custody who might be subject to DHS detainer requests, including those who could otherwise be released, would also be directly affected by a change in DC's detention practices.
Why it matters
If enacted, DC agencies and officials would be federally barred from following any local rule that limits cooperation with immigration enforcement, effectively nullifying DC's existing sanctuary framework. Individuals in DC custody could be held beyond their ordinary release date at DHS's request, and DC government employees could face pressure to share immigration-status information with federal and other government entities.
What would change
Agencies directed to act
Funding and costs
Congressional Budget Office estimate
CBO estimates that H.R. 2056 would have no significant effect on the federal deficit, with any changes to direct spending, revenues, and the deficit falling between -$500,000 and $500,000 in any year and over the 2025–2035 period.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2056 would slightly reduce direct spending — because aliens who would be detained or deported are eligible for certain federal benefits such as emergency Medicaid — but that the effect would not be significant in any year or over the 2025–2035 period, as only a small number of people would be affected. The bill would have no effect on revenues. Any costs to implement the bill would be subject to appropriated funds and are also estimated to be insignificant. The bill would impose an intergovernmental mandate by preempting D.C. laws that limit cooperation with federal immigration agencies, but CBO estimates the cost of that mandate would not exceed the annual UMRA threshold of $103 million (in 2025 dollars); the bill contains no private-sector mandates.
How implementation would work
The bill is largely self-executing as a federal preemption: any DC statute, ordinance, policy, or practice conflicting with its two operative prohibitions would become unenforceable. No federal agency rulemaking or grant mechanism is established. DHS would continue to issue detainer and release-notification requests under its existing Immigration and Nationality Act authority; DC officials would be required to comply rather than decline. The bill specifies no penalty or enforcement process for non-compliance.
Legislative status & sources
Latest action
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Official CRS summary
Show the CRS summaryHide the CRS summary
This bill prohibits the District of Columbia (DC) from limiting its cooperation with federal immigration enforcement activities, except for certain instances involving witnesses and victims of crime.
Specifically, the bill bars DC from adopting a law, policy, or practice prohibiting DC governmental entities from sending, receiving, maintaining, or exchanging information regarding the citizenship or immigration status of any individual with a federal, state, or local government entity.
Further, DC may not adopt a law, policy, or practice of not complying with lawful requests from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to comply with a detainer for, or notify about the release of, an individual from custody. (A detainer is a formal request from DHS that a state or locality hold an individual in custody for up to 48 hours after the individual would otherwise be released so that DHS may facilitate the individual's removal.)
The bill provides exceptions allowing DC to adopt policies of not sharing information or complying with a detainer request regarding an individual who comes forward as a victim or a witness of a crime.
Legislative subjects
District of Columbia; Federal preemption; Immigration; Immigration status and procedures; State and local government operations
Committee report
H. Rept. 119-131