The "Grant Integrity and Border Security Act" ensures federal grant applicants certify they have not and will not violate laws against bringing in or harboring illegal aliens, with penalties for violations. It also mandates the sharing of information about violators to prevent future infractions.
Virginia Foxx
Representative
NC-5
The "Grant Integrity and Border Security Act" mandates that applicants for federal grants must certify they have not, are not, and will not violate laws against bringing in or harboring undocumented immigrants. The Act allows federal agencies to withhold funds from grantees found in violation of immigration laws. It also requires the Attorney General to provide information on individuals convicted or suspected of violating these laws.
New Grant Rule Ties Funding to Immigration Law Compliance: Applicants Must Certify No Violations
This new bill, called the "Grant Integrity and Border Security Act," throws a major curveball at anyone applying for federal grants. It links grant eligibility to strict compliance with immigration laws, specifically around bringing in and harboring certain aliens. Basically, if you're getting federal money, you and your organization need to be squeaky clean on this front.
Certification Central
The core of this bill is a new certification requirement. Every organization applying for a federal grant now has to promise three things: they haven't violated Section 274(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324(a)) in the past 10 years, they aren't currently violating it, and they won't violate it during the grant period. This section of the law deals with bringing in and harboring undocumented immigrants. For example, a nonprofit providing shelter to asylum seekers could potentially be impacted, depending on how "harboring" is interpreted. It's not just about breaking the law. This is a proactive promise.
The Withholding Power
This is where things get real. If an agency head thinks a grantee is violating this part of the immigration law, they can withhold funds. This isn't just based on a court conviction. The bill (Section 2) states that the decision can be made on information from Homeland Security, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, an employee's conviction or admission of guilt, or even just "other credible information." The vagueness of "credible information" is a big deal. It introduces uncertainty for organizations that might be working with vulnerable populations.
The AG's Role
The bill also directs the Attorney General to share information with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Within 90 days of a conviction, admission of guilt, or the completion of an investigation, the AG must provide information about individuals "reasonably believed" to have violated Section 274(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Think about it: even if someone is just suspected and an investigation is complete (but not necessarily resulting in charges or a conviction), that information gets shared. This could have significant consequences for individuals and the organizations they work for.
Real-World Ripple Effects
Imagine a local community center that provides various services, including English classes and legal aid, to immigrants. They rely on federal grants to operate. If even one employee is suspected of violating this immigration law, the entire center's funding could be at risk. This could apply to a wide range of organizations, from those providing humanitarian aid to universities conducting research. The broad scope and the reliance on "credible information" create a level of uncertainty that could chill legitimate activities.
This bill is a preventative measure, and it's not clear how it will interact with existing laws. It is clear that the bill has the potential to significantly impact organizations working with immigrant communities. The broad language and enforcement mechanisms raise concerns about due process and the potential for overreach.