Congress reasserts control over travel bans, adds religion to visa nondiscrimination law
H.R. 924 — NO BAN Act · Filed by Judy Chu (D-CA) · 122 cosponsors · Introduced Feb 4, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill restricts the President's power to ban entry by nationality or religion. It requires the President to prove specific security threats (not just broad claims), use the least restrictive method, set an end date, and notify Congress within 48 hours with evidence. Congress gets 48 hours to review; if no briefing arrives, the ban automatically ends. It also adds religion to the list of factors the government cannot use to discriminate in visa decisions, and demands detailed public reports on past travel bans.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core mechanism is procedural: it constrains executive unilateral power over entry suspensions by requiring evidence, congressional notice, narrow tailoring, and automatic termination. It simultaneously expands statutory nondiscrimination protections to include religion and nonimmigrant visas. Both are structural reforms to immigration law, not market-driven or commemorative.
What the text implies
- The 48-hour congressional notification and automatic termination trigger may create pressure for rapid legislative action or emergency procedures, potentially shifting power dynamics in Congress during crises.
- Requirement for 'specific and credible facts' and 'least restrictive means' will likely generate litigation over what constitutes sufficient evidence and whether tailoring is narrow enough, creating uncertainty for executive branch implementation.
- Retroactive reporting requirement on past proclamations (9645, 9822, 9983) and executive orders may expose data on visa denials and waiver decisions that were previously opaque, potentially informing future legal challenges.
- The rebuttable presumption in favor of family and humanitarian waivers may create administrative burden and litigation risk if the executive branch denies waivers without clear justification.
- Public availability of unclassified reports may limit the government's ability to withhold intelligence or security rationales, potentially constraining future executive flexibility in national security determinations.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
The bill restores congressional oversight and judicial review of entry suspensions, requires evidence-based justification, and adds religion to statutory nondiscrimination protections. Ordinary citizens and visa applicants gain transparency, due process, and protection against blanket nationality or religion-based bans. The procedural constraints and automatic termination mechanism reduce the risk of indefinite, arbitrary exclusions.
Named in the bill
Secretary of State, Secretary of Homeland Security, President, Congress, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, House Committee on the Judiciary, House Committee on Homeland Security — and 7 more
Where it stands
122 cosponsors: 122 Democrats.
- Feb 4, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Feb 4, 2025 — Referred to House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and House Committee on Homeland Security · Congress.gov: “Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
2 lobbying clients named this bill on 4 disclosure filings across 3 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $2,020,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 71 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 41% of bills with at least one filing.
Judy Chu, the sponsor, reported $430,500 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- Friends Committee on National Legislation — $2,000,000 on 2 filings
- National Council of Jewish Women — $20,000 on 2 filings
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (9,296 characters) on Oct 31, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,778 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 20, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-31.
“Congress reasserts control over travel bans, adds religion to visa nondiscrimination law” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr924 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.