H.R. 1061: Protecting Sensitive Locations Act

For decades, a simple agency memo kept immigration enforcement away from schools, hospitals, and churches. The policy worked — not because it had legal teeth, but because administrations honored it. On January 20, 2025, DHS rescinded that protection, and what followed landed in the data almost immediately.

School attendance dropped measurably in immigrant neighborhoods after ICE operations were announced. Back-to-school vaccinations for Hispanic children in Dallas fell from 11,500 to 5,800 — a 50% drop in one year. One in five immigrant parents reported their child's well-being suffered from immigration-related fear, including changes in eating, sleeping, and school performance. The chilling effect reached health care workers too: 84% reported significant or moderate decreases in patient visits after January 2025.

H.R. 1061 takes the protections that existed as policy guidance and writes them into federal law — specifically, into Section 287 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The bill bars ICE, CBP, and state or local officers acting under federal immigration authority from conducting enforcement actions at, focused on, or within 1,000 feet of any sensitive location. The list is exhaustive: hospitals, schools (preschool through university), churches, courthouses, polling places, domestic violence shelters, child care centers, DMVs, Social Security offices, public libraries, disaster relief sites, labor union halls, congressional offices, funerals, and weddings.

The enforcement mechanism is what separates this from the old policy memos. If an agent conducts an arrest that violates the 1,000-foot rule, two things happen: every piece of information gathered during that action gets thrown out of the removal proceeding, and the person targeted can file a motion for immediate termination of their case. That turns a policy preference into a legal tripwire — agents who break the rule don't just get scolded, they lose the case.

The bill builds in a real-time check for gray areas. If an agent isn't sure whether an emergency justifies action near a sensitive location, the bill requires them to stop, contact a supervisor, and wait for affirmative confirmation before proceeding. No confirmation, no action. That supervisor requirement runs through a specific chain of command — ICE Field Office Directors, CBP Chief Patrol Agents, and named officials who must authorize any action.

Exceptions exist but they're narrow. True emergencies — imminent risk of death or violence, hot pursuit of someone posing an immediate danger, a direct national security threat, or imminent destruction of criminal evidence — still permit enforcement. And a rare, premeditated operation targeting a terrorism suspect or someone posing extraordinary public safety danger can proceed with prior written approval from a senior official. But the bill requires a detailed report to the DHS Inspector General and the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties within 30 days of every sensitive-location enforcement action, plus annual reports from both ICE and CBP to six congressional committees.

Senator Blumenthal introduced a Senate companion bill the same day. The bill has 146 cosponsors — all Democrats — and sits in the House Judiciary Committee, where the Republican majority controls whether it moves.