This bill requires states to reimburse the federal government for military deployment costs incurred due to local obstruction of federal immigration enforcement operations.
Jodey Arrington
Representative
TX-19
This bill requires states to reimburse the federal government for the costs of deploying military forces, such as the National Guard, when state or local obstruction of federal immigration enforcement leads to civil unrest. If a state fails to pay the resulting invoice from the Department of Defense within 180 days, the President is authorized to withhold federal discretionary grant funds to cover the debt. This legislation establishes financial accountability for local interference with federal immigration operations.
Federal Bill Threatens to Charge States for Military Deployments if They Don't Cooperate on Immigration Enforcement
The State Accountability for Federal Deployment Costs Act of 2025 is a proposed law that sets up a system to bill states if their lack of cooperation with federal immigration enforcement leads to civil unrest severe enough to require military intervention. Essentially, if a state or local government refuses to help federal immigration operations—say, by ignoring requests to hold certain individuals—and that refusal results in public disorder that requires the Department of Defense (DoD) to send in troops, the state gets the tab.
The Federal-State Financial Showdown
This bill is based on the finding that immigration enforcement is strictly a federal job, and states that actively obstruct or fail to reasonably support these operations are causing problems. If the federal government has to deploy military personnel (under authority like 10 U.S.C. § 12406) to quell civil unrest that happened during a lawful immigration operation, the Secretary of Defense will send an invoice to the state's Governor. The costs are specific: temporary travel expenses (TDY), daily allowances (per diem), housing, food, and moving costs for the troops and their gear. These deployments can cost millions, meaning states could face massive, unexpected financial burdens.
Who Decides if a State Was Naughty?
Before the bill is sent, the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS), working with the Attorney General (AG), must make a public determination that the state or local government’s actions (or lack thereof) failed to reasonably support the federal operation, causing the unrest. This is a key provision because the definition of 'unrest' and 'reasonable cooperation' is left up to the DHS and AG. For residents, this means that a political decision made in Washington could trigger a huge financial penalty for their state based on criteria that aren't crystal clear in the bill itself. It raises questions about whether this process could be used to target states with differing policy views.
The Grant Clawback: What Happens If States Don’t Pay?
States have 180 days to pay the DoD back once they receive the invoice. If they miss that deadline, the President gets the power to step in. After consulting with the heads of relevant departments (Defense, Homeland Security, Justice), the President can cancel or reduce discretionary federal grants given to that state to cover the unpaid amount. This is where the impact hits everyday people the hardest. Discretionary grants often fund things like infrastructure improvements, public health programs, or education initiatives. If your state is billed $50 million for a military deployment and refuses to pay, the President could pull $50 million out of the grant money earmarked for fixing local highways or supporting community health centers. The state taxpayers who had nothing to do with the original policy dispute end up paying the price through cuts to essential services.