Block Entry for Social Security and ID Fraud

Full Title:
Consequences for Social Security Fraud Act

Summary#

This bill would change U.S. immigration law so that noncitizens who commit certain kinds of fraud involving Social Security numbers, Social Security cards, identification documents, or certain COVID-related loan or grant frauds are barred from entering the United States and can be removed (deported). The rule covers people convicted of those crimes, people who admit they committed them, and people who conspired to commit them. The stated policy goal is to make those kinds of fraud grounds for inadmissibility and deportability.

Key changes:

  • Adds a new ground of inadmissibility for any alien convicted of, admitting to, or admitting to acts that make up: Social Security Act section 208 offenses, fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1028 (ID fraud), specified COVID-related loan or grant frauds, or conspiracies to commit those offenses.
  • Adds a matching ground of deportability for aliens with the same convictions or admissions.
  • The “covered COVID offense” is defined to include fraud involving certain Small Business Administration loans and certain COVID relief grants from two named laws.
  • The language covers convictions, admissions, and conspiracies equally.

What it means for you#

  • Noncitizens generally: If you are not a U.S. citizen and you were convicted of, admitted to, or admitted acts that make up Social Security fraud, ID-document fraud, certain COVID relief frauds, or a conspiracy to commit those crimes, this bill would make you inadmissible (bar entry or visa/adjustment) and deportable (subject to removal).
  • People applying for visas or green cards: These offenses would be explicit legal reasons to deny admission, refuse a visa, or refuse adjustment of immigration status.
  • Lawful permanent residents (green card holders) and other people already in the U.S.: Because the bill adds deportability, people who are not U.S. citizens could be put in removal proceedings and could be deported if they meet the bill’s criteria. This would likely affect green card holders and some nonimmigrant visa holders.
  • People with convictions long ago or plea admissions: The bill covers convictions and admissions; this could affect people with old convictions or who have admitted conduct in court or other settings. It does not say whether timing (when the crime happened) matters.
  • Victims of identity theft: The bill’s text applies to crimes and admissions. It does not explicitly exclude people who used a Social Security number because they were victims of identity theft. How those cases would be handled is not made clear.

Expenses#

No publicly available information about the bill’s cost or a fiscal estimate was provided in the materials supplied.

This could mean:

  • This change would likely increase workloads for immigration enforcement, immigration courts, and case processing.
  • There could be additional costs for detention, removal proceedings, and legal handling of more deportation cases.
  • The bill does not include any fees, funding, or estimates to cover those possible costs.

Proponents' View#

The bill appears intended to:

  • Make fraud involving Social Security numbers, Social Security cards, identification documents, and certain COVID relief schemes a clear and enforceable immigration ground.
  • Deter and punish people who commit identity-related fraud or pandemic-relief fraud by blocking them from entry and allowing removal.
  • Protect integrity of Social Security and federal benefit systems and of COVID-relief programs by tying immigration consequences to fraud convictions and admissions.

Opponents' View#

One can identify several concerns based on the bill’s text:

  • The bill treats convictions and admissions the same way, which could lead to removal based on an admission that might have been part of a plea bargain, misunderstanding, or a statement made without legal advice.
  • The language does not clearly protect people who were victims of identity theft or who used another person’s number without knowing it.
  • The bill does not state whether there are waivers, exceptions, or discretionary relief for people with minimal or old offenses.
  • It is unclear whether the change is intended to be retroactive (apply to past crimes) and how that timing would be handled.
  • The bill may increase enforcement and court workloads and could raise costs for immigration agencies and the courts; no cost estimate is provided.
  • The definitions and scope (for example exactly which loan or grant frauds qualify) may require additional interpretation by agencies or courts.