Federal Working Animal Protection Act
Introduced July 23, 2025 · Last action March 19, 2026
Plain English Summary
This bill amends immigration law to make any foreign national (alien) who has been convicted of, admits to, or commits acts that constitute harming animals used in law enforcement inadmissible to the United States and deportable if already present. The law applies federal criminal penalties under 18 U.S.C. § 1368 as the basis for immigration consequences.
Who benefits
Law enforcement agencies (federal, state, and local) that deploy police dogs, horses, and other animals in official capacity; animal welfare advocates focused on protection of working animals; immigration enforcement officials who gain an additional removal ground
Who pays / loses
Foreign nationals (non-U.S. citizens) convicted of harming law enforcement animals face deportation or bars to entry; immigrants with prior convictions for animal harm to law enforcement animals become deportable; individuals in removal proceedings who admit to such conduct
Funding & Lobbying Interests
Law enforcement unions and police organizations (who advocate for officer and animal safety protections), animal welfare organizations focused on working animal protection (such as those lobbying for anti-animal cruelty statutes), and immigration enforcement agencies benefit from this provision. No specific donor or lobbying finance data was provided in the bill materials.
Political Impact
Affected Groups
Foreign nationals with convictions for harming police dogs, law enforcement horses, or other animals used by law enforcement agencies; immigrants in deportation proceedings; law enforcement agencies and their personnel who work with animals in official capacity; families of foreign nationals subject to deportation under this provision
Political Subtext
Proponents frame this as protecting those who protect the public—law enforcement animals are working officers deserving protection. Critics (if any emerge) may argue this creates a deportation ground for a narrow criminal category that overlaps substantially with existing animal cruelty grounds, potentially making the provision redundant. Bipartisan consensus typically surrounds animal protection measures, particularly those involving law enforcement. No significant opposing evidence exists regarding the efficacy or appropriateness of this penalty.
Real-World Stakes
This creates a specific, categorical removal ground for a discrete criminal conduct. Analogous state-level animal cruelty laws (every state criminalizes animal cruelty under general statutes) have not generated significant immigration consequences historically. The federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 1368 applies to intentional harm to animals used by law enforcement, military, Department of Homeland Security, and other federal agencies. The effect is to make a specific federal felony an automatic deportation trigger for non-citizens. No CBO score or civil rights assessment was provided in the bill text. The practical impact is limited to foreign nationals convicted of this specific crime—a small population given the federal-level specificity of § 1368.
What's Inside This Bill
Non-obvious provisions not apparent from the headline summary.
Admission of guilt as deportation trigger without conviction
The bill makes deportable any foreign national who 'admits to' harming law enforcement animals, not just those convicted. An admission could be made in various contexts (interviews, social media, casual conversation) without formal criminal proceedings or due process protections typical of conviction.
AffectsForeign nationals, including permanent residents and visa holders, who could be deported based on statements rather than court-proven guilt, potentially affecting those with language barriers or who make statements during immigration proceedings.
Future criminal conduct triggers automatic inadmissibility
The bill covers foreign nationals who 'commit acts' harming law enforcement animals, meaning it applies retroactively to anyone who has engaged in such conduct at any point in their past, even decades before the law's enactment.
AffectsForeign nationals with old, resolved incidents involving animals that were not originally prosecuted as federal crimes but could now be recharacterized under this law as grounds for deportation or denial of entry.
Incorporation of 18 U.S.C. § 1368 without independent definition
The bill relies entirely on the existing federal statute's definition of 'law enforcement animals' and what constitutes 'harm,' which may have technical or narrow legal definitions not aligned with common understanding, and amendments to that statute in the future would automatically apply to immigration consequences.
AffectsForeign nationals could face immigration consequences based on changes to the underlying federal criminal statute made by future legislation, without any legislative action updating immigration law itself.
No explicit exception for accidents, self-defense, or lawful actions
The bill does not specify whether the provision applies only to intentional harm or also covers accidents, self-defense scenarios, or lawful actions (e.g., veterinary procedures, animal control work). The language 'commits acts' is broad and does not include standard criminal law exceptions.
AffectsForeign nationals working in veterinary medicine, animal control, law enforcement, or security who may inadvertently or lawfully interact with law enforcement animals could face deportation if any injury occurs.
Sponsor
Co-sponsors (19)
RRep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17]RRep. Harrigan, Pat [R-NC-10]RRep. Newhouse, Dan [R-WA-4]RRep. Bacon, Don [R-NE-2]RRep. Gill, Brandon [R-TX-26]RRep. Tenney, Claudia [R-NY-24]RRep. McClintock, Tom [R-CA-5]RRep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48]RRep. Buchanan, Vern [R-FL-16]RRep. Williams, Roger [R-TX-25]RRep. LaLota, Nick [R-NY-1]RRep. Mace, Nancy [R-SC-1]RRep. Webster, Daniel [R-FL-11]RRep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4]RRep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1]RRep. Rulli, Michael A. [R-OH-6]RRep. Stauber, Pete [R-MN-8]RRep. Tiffany, Thomas P. [R-WI-7]RRep. Crane, Elijah [R-AZ-2]
Vote Record
Passed: 228–190R 213–0 · D 15–190
| Name | Party | State / District | Vote |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rep. Adams, Alma S. [D-NC-12] | D | NC-12 | Nay |
| Rep. Aderholt, Robert B. [R-AL-4] | R | AL-4 | Yea |
| Rep. Aguilar, Pete [D-CA-33] | D | CA-33 | Nay |
| Rep. Alford, Mark [R-MO-4] | R | MO-4 | Yea |
| Rep. Allen, Rick W. [R-GA-12] | R | GA-12 | Yea |
| Rep. Amo, Gabe [D-RI-1] | D | RI-1 | Nay |
| Rep. Amodei, Mark E. [R-NV-2] | R | NV-2 | Yea |
| Rep. Ansari, Yassamin [D-AZ-3] | D | AZ-3 | Nay |
| Rep. Arrington, Jodey C. [R-TX-19] | R | TX-19 | Yea |
| Rep. Auchincloss, Jake [D-MA-4] |
Campaign Finance — Primary Sponsor
No campaign finance data available yet.
501(c)(4) disclosure: Contributions from 501(c)(4) "dark money" organizations are not required to be publicly disclosed and are not reflected in the figures above. Data sourced from FEC public disclosure filings.
Community Discussion
Share this bill
Sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Be the first.