HR-8586-119
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsored by Barry Moore (R-AL)
What it does
This bill would make four major changes to the Immigration and Nationality Act. First, it would replace the current employment-based visa system with a points-based system that ranks applicants by salary, education, English proficiency, age, military service, and extraordinary achievement, requiring a minimum of 16 points and a job offer paying at least 150–200% of the state median wage. Second, it would eliminate the Diversity Visa Lottery and redirect those visa slots to religious workers. Third, it would narrow family-based immigration to only spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, eliminating visa categories for parents, adult siblings, and adult children. Fourth, it would require employment-based visa applicants to attest to a set of "American values," including disavowing genocide, honor killings, female genital mutilation, sex-selective abortion, and governmentally enforced religious law.
Who benefits
High-earning, highly educated foreign workers — particularly those with STEM degrees, U.S. university credentials, or extraordinary professional achievements — who would be prioritized under the points system. U.S. workers in fields where employers currently use employment-based visas, who would gain stronger recruitment and non-displacement protections. Religious worker visa applicants, who would receive a dedicated visa allocation. Employers who hire high-wage foreign workers and comply with attestation requirements. Spouses and minor children of lawful permanent residents, who retain a dedicated visa category. Indirectly, workers in lower-wage labor markets who may face less wage competition from foreign workers who cannot meet the salary thresholds.
Who is hurt
Prospective immigrants who currently qualify under eliminated family preference categories — including parents of U.S. citizens, adult siblings, and adult children of citizens and permanent residents — who would lose their visa pathways entirely, including those with pending petitions. Nationals of countries that currently rely heavily on the Diversity Visa Lottery (primarily African and Eastern European countries), who would lose that pathway. Lower-wage or mid-wage foreign workers who cannot meet the 150–200% median wage threshold. Employers in industries that rely on mid-skill foreign labor. U.S. citizens and permanent residents who would no longer be able to sponsor parents for permanent residence. Immigrants aged 52 or older, who are ineligible under the age cap. Immigrants with foreign degrees who score fewer points than U.S.-educated peers. Families currently in multi-year visa backlogs under eliminated preference categories, whose approved petitions would be invalidated.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the current immigration system, built around family ties and a random lottery, does not prioritize economic contribution or national need. They contend that a merit-based, points-driven system — modeled on approaches used by Canada and Australia — would attract higher-earning workers who contribute more in taxes, fill documented labor shortages in high-skill fields, and are less likely to compete with lower-wage American workers. They further argue that the employer attestation requirements and recruitment mandates would close documented loopholes in the H-1B system that have allowed some employers to displace American workers, and that the "values" attestation codifies existing inadmissibility grounds for conduct such as genocide and honor killings into a clearer statutory framework.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that eliminating family preference categories would separate hundreds of thousands of families already in legal backlogs, and that the points system's high salary and age thresholds would effectively exclude immigrants from developing countries who lack access to U.S.-equivalent credentials — skewing the system toward already-advantaged applicants from wealthy nations. They contend that the "values" attestation provision is constitutionally suspect, as it conditions immigration benefits on ideological and religious commitments — such as opposition to "sex-selective abortion" — that may function as viewpoint-based screening in violation of the First Amendment and due process principles. They also note that eliminating the Diversity Visa Lottery would sharply reduce immigration from Africa and Eastern Europe, regions that currently depend on it most.
Constitutional context
Congress holds broad authority over immigration under the Naturalization Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 4) and the Necessary and Proper Clause. The "values" attestation provision raises potential First Amendment and Fifth Amendment Due Process concerns, as it conditions a federal benefit on ideological and expressive commitments — including past written or published speech — though the Supreme Court has historically afforded Congress wide plenary power over the terms of admission. The provision barring judicial review of the Secretary of Labor's investigation-initiation decisions may also face scrutiny under due process principles, though courts have generally permitted such limits in immigration-adjacent administrative contexts. Post-Loper Bright (2024), courts will independently review agency interpretations of the points criteria and attestation standards rather than deferring to DHS or DOL.
Checks and balances
Congress gains authority by restructuring the statutory visa framework; the Executive Branch (DHS, DOL, State) implements the points system and attestation requirements, but faces heightened judicial scrutiny of its interpretations under Loper Bright (2024), and the bill itself limits judicial review of certain DOL investigation decisions.
Historical precedent
The RAISE Act (introduced in 2017 and 2019) proposed a similar shift to a merit-based points system and elimination of the Diversity Visa Lottery but did not advance to a floor vote; no comparable overhaul of the family and employment visa system has been enacted since the Immigration Act of 1990.