Republicans in Congress are moving to protect President Donald Trump’s immigration policies from being overturned by a future Democratic administration.
Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., is calling on the Senate to consider a package of seven immigration bills addressing border security, birthright citizenship, work visas, commercial driver’s licenses and chain migration.
With the midterm elections approaching, Banks believes Republicans have a limited opportunity to turn Trump’s executive policies into lasting federal law. Executive orders can be reversed by a future president, while legislation is much harder to undo.
Republicans Face Pressure To Act Before Midterms
Banks warned that Democrats could reverse many of Trump’s immigration actions if they regain control of Congress and the White House.
The Indiana senator said he is especially concerned about the growing influence of the Democratic Party’s socialist wing, which has supported major changes to immigration and law enforcement policies.
Banks argued that progressive Democrats favor weaker border enforcement, restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement and reduced support for police departments.
Current Democratic leaders are not formally aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America. However, Banks believes the party’s progressive faction could have greater control over a future Democratic majority.
He also said immigration policy has direct consequences for American jobs, wages and public safety.
Dalilah Law Would Tighten Commercial Driving Rules
One of the most prominent proposals in the package is the Dalilah Law, named after Indiana first-grader Dalilah Coleman.
Coleman suffered severe injuries in a multi-vehicle highway accident involving a tractor-trailer. According to supporters of the legislation, the truck was driven by Partap Singh, an Indian national who had received a commercial driver’s license in California.
The young girl spent months receiving hospital care and underwent extensive medical treatment following the crash.
Banks’ bill would prevent states from issuing commercial driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants and certain categories of foreign nationals. It would also require states to revoke some existing licenses covered by the proposal.
Commercial driving examinations would have to be administered in English under the legislation.
Supporters describe the Dalilah Law as a transportation-safety counterpart to the Laken Riley Act. They argue that individuals operating large commercial vehicles should meet consistent federal standards, regardless of the state issuing the license.
Banks said Indiana residents have been injured or killed in accidents involving foreign drivers licensed in states such as California, New York and Pennsylvania.
Federal Transportation Money Could Be Used As Leverage
The proposal would connect federal transportation funding to state compliance with the new commercial licensing requirements.
Banks compared the strategy to the method Congress used during the Reagan administration to encourage states to raise the minimum drinking age.
Rather than directly controlling every state licensing decision, Washington could withhold certain federal funds from states that refuse to follow the proposed requirements.
Supporters say the approach would create consistent nationwide standards. Critics could challenge the measure as an expansion of federal influence over state transportation policies.
Congress Could Receive More Authority Over TPS
Banks also wants Congress to assume greater control over Temporary Protected Status, commonly called TPS.
The federal government may grant TPS to eligible people from countries affected by armed conflict, natural disasters or other dangerous conditions. Recipients can generally remain and work legally in the United States for a designated period.
Banks argues that previous Democratic administrations expanded or extended those protections too broadly. His proposal would give Congress a larger role in deciding when TPS should be authorized.
The senator said putting these rules into federal law would allow Congress to address the issue long after Trump leaves the White House.
Supporters believe congressional oversight would prevent presidents from using TPS as a substitute for permanent immigration legislation. Opponents may argue that presidents need flexibility to respond quickly to international emergencies.
H-1B Bill Focuses On American Workers
Another proposal, the American Tech Workforce Act, would make substantial changes to the H-1B visa program.
The legislation would increase the minimum salary threshold for many H-1B positions from $60,000 to $150,000.
The H-1B program allows American employers to hire foreign professionals for certain specialized occupations. It is widely used in technology, engineering, medicine and other skilled industries.
Supporters of the reform argue that some employers use the program to hire less expensive foreign workers instead of qualified Americans. They believe a higher salary requirement would reserve H-1B visas for genuinely specialized and highly compensated positions.
The proposal could also give American college graduates a better opportunity to compete for entry-level technology jobs.
Businesses And Immigration Attorneys Raise Concerns
Immigration attorneys and business groups have warned that the proposed salary requirement could make the United States less attractive to international students and skilled foreign professionals.
Texas immigration firm Reddy Neumann & Brown said many employers may be unable or unwilling to meet the $150,000 threshold. The firm suggested the change could limit H-1B hiring primarily to major technology companies and employers filling highly specialized positions.
Smaller businesses, universities and nonprofit organizations could face particular difficulty meeting the higher salary requirement.
Supporters view those concerns as evidence that reform is necessary. They argue that American immigration policy should prioritize domestic workers while still allowing companies to recruit foreign talent for positions that cannot be filled at home.
Birthright Citizenship And Chain Migration Also Targeted
The wider Republican immigration package includes additional bills addressing several long-standing conservative priorities.
The proposals would:
- Restrict birthright citizenship under federal law.
- Reduce forms of family-based immigration commonly described as chain migration.
- Direct additional border-security funding to the Department of War.
- Penalize colleges that employ individuals who are not legally authorized to work in the United States.
- Strengthen oversight of employment-based visa programs.
- Establish stricter commercial driver’s license requirements.
- Give Congress greater control over Temporary Protected Status.
Banks described the measures as common-sense protections for American workers, families and communities.
Proposals involving birthright citizenship would likely face major legal challenges. The 14th Amendment states that people born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens, but lawmakers continue to debate how that language should apply in immigration cases.
Why Passing Federal Laws Matters
Trump has used executive authority to pursue significant changes to border and immigration policy. However, executive actions do not carry the same permanence as laws passed by Congress.
A future president could rescind Trump’s executive orders or replace them with different enforcement priorities. Repealing an enacted federal law would generally require another bill to pass the House and Senate before receiving presidential approval.
That is why Banks wants Republicans to act while they have an opportunity to advance Trump’s agenda through Congress.
The legislation must still overcome political and procedural hurdles in the Senate. Immigration remains one of Washington’s most divisive issues, and several provisions are expected to face strong Democratic opposition.
Immigration Could Become A Major Midterm Issue
Border security, employment and public safety are likely to remain important issues heading into the midterm elections.
Republicans are expected to argue that permanent legislation is necessary to protect American jobs and prevent future administrations from reversing Trump’s policies. Democrats and immigration advocates will likely contend that some of the proposals are too restrictive or legally questionable.
For voters, the debate involves more than one presidential administration. Congress must decide whether Trump’s immigration agenda will remain a collection of temporary executive actions or become a lasting part of federal law.
Banks believes the window for action is closing—and that Republicans may not get another opportunity if control of Congress changes hands.
