HR-10107-119
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsored by Ritchie Torres (D-NY)
What it does
This bill would require U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to collect emergency contact information from individuals it takes into custody and to notify those contacts within set timeframes (generally 12-24 hours) of a death, serious illness, or serious injury. It would apply to all detention facilities regardless of who operates them, impose civil penalties of $100,000 per day on noncompliant contractors, create a private right to sue the government and contractors for statutory damages of at least $100,000 per violation, and require public and congressional reporting on deaths in custody.
Who benefits
Detained individuals and their families, who would gain a guaranteed right to timely information about a loved one's death or medical crisis; immigration attorneys, who would receive parallel notification; advocacy and oversight organizations seeking data on detention conditions; and potentially the government itself, which could reduce liability exposure through standardized procedures.
Who is hurt
ICE and the Department of Homeland Security, which would bear new administrative and compliance burdens without additional appropriated funds; private contractors and local governments operating detention facilities under intergovernmental agreements, who face steep per-day civil penalties and contract termination risk for noncompliance; and potentially detained individuals themselves if facilities respond to litigation risk by reducing information sharing or altering custody practices in ways not intended by the bill.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that families of people in ICE custody have in past cases gone days or weeks without learning of a relative's death or hospitalization, and that basic humane notification standards—already common in state prisons and the military—should apply to immigration detention. They contend that the bill's civil penalties and private right of action are necessary because voluntary agency guidance has failed to ensure consistent, timely notification, citing the bill's detailed timelines and documentation requirements as evidence that current practice is inadequate.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the $100,000-per-day penalties and uncapped statutory damages of at least $100,000 per violation could be financially devastating for contractors and local governments running detention facilities, potentially driving them out of the business and reducing detention capacity or facility options. They contend that the bill imposes an unfunded mandate—since no additional appropriations are authorized—that could divert existing DHS resources from other operations while inviting extensive litigation regardless of whether facilities acted in good faith.
Constitutional context
Congress has broad authority under Article I to regulate the treatment of individuals held in federal immigration custody, and the bill's waiver of sovereign immunity for civil suits falls within Congress's recognized power to consent to suits against the United States. Due process concerns could arise regarding contractors facing civil penalties without an agency adjudication process, though the bill routes penalties through contract terms rather than direct administrative enforcement, which may reduce Seventh Amendment jury-trial concerns raised in Jarkesy.
Checks and balances
Congress would direct executive branch procedure at DHS/ICE and create a judicial enforcement mechanism through private lawsuits, shifting oversight of detention practices partly from the executive to federal courts and shifting some financial risk onto contractors through required contract terms.
Historical precedent
The Death in Custody Reporting Act of 2013 established federal reporting requirements for deaths in state and local custody, and this bill explicitly states it does not displace that Act while extending more detailed notification and enforcement requirements specifically to ICE detention.