House Judiciary Committee Markup: "Remove Act" and "Law Enforcement Innovate to Deescalate Act"

Markup of the "Remove Act"

• 🎯 The House Judiciary Committee marked up the "Remove Act," a bill aimed at expediting immigration removal proceedings.
• 🗣️ Proponents argued the bill is necessary to enforce immigration laws, reduce backlogs, and prevent exploitation of the system, citing the "America First" mandate.
• ⚖️ Opponents contended the bill strips due process, is unworkable within the 15-day timeline, and lacks necessary resources, potentially leading to unfair decisions.
• ⚠️ An amendment to ensure adequate judges and staff before implementing the 15-day timeline was proposed but ultimately failed.
• 📈 The "Remove Act" was adopted by the committee, with a recorded vote of 14 "yes" and 9 "no."

Markup of the "Law Enforcement Innovate to Deescalate Act"

• ⚡ The committee also marked up HR 2189, the "Law Enforcement Innovate to Deescalate Act of 2025," which seeks to update the definition of "firearm" to accommodate less-lethal technologies like tasers.
• 💡 Supporters argued the bill is crucial for modernizing law enforcement tools, promoting deescalation, reducing fatal encounters, and clarifying liability concerns that prevent agencies from adopting new technologies.
• 🚨 Opponents expressed concerns that the bill creates a dangerous loophole, potentially allowing prohibited individuals to access untraceable and undetectable weapons, thereby undermining gun safety laws.
• 🤝 An amendment to the bill was adopted, primarily making technical changes to the title.
• ✅ The revised bill passed the committee with a recorded vote of 18 "yes" and 8 "no."

Discussion on "Protecting Our Courts from Foreign Manipulation Act"

• 🏛️ The committee began discussing HR 2675, the "Protecting Our Courts from Foreign Manipulation Act," aimed at addressing foreign interference in US litigation through lawfare.
• 💰 The bill proposes disclosure requirements for foreign funding of litigation and prohibits arrangements where foreign states or sovereign wealth funds are the source of funding.
• ⚖️ Proponents argued the bill is necessary to prevent foreign adversaries from harassing US entities, stealing intellectual property, and manipulating the legal system.
• 🚫 Opponents raised concerns that the bill is overly broad, could harm ordinary citizens' ability to access justice, and may not effectively target national security threats, potentially being used as a cloak to disadvantage smaller litigants.