Stop Illegal Entry Act reaches Senate with 10–20 year sentences for criminal reentrants

By Shaina Cole | Contributing Writer, Rocky Mountain Voice

The House voted 226–197 to pass the Stop Illegal Entry Act of 2025 (H.R. 3486). The bill updates 8 U.S.C. § 1325 and § 1326, the federal laws on illegal entry and reentry, and was received in the Senate on September 15, where it now awaits committee consideration.

For first-time offenders, the penalty doesn’t change — up to six months in jail.

But, anyone caught crossing again could face up to five years in prison and a fine. The bill also sets penalties for people who try to help others cross illegally.

The biggest changes involve reentry after deportation. The baseline remains up to two years. But if someone has three or more misdemeanors involving drugs or crimes against others, or any felony, the maximum rises to 10 years. For those with an aggravated felony, the maximum goes to 20 years.

The bill also brings in mandatory minimums for the first time: at least ten years for reentry after an aggravated felony, and at least ten years for reentry after violent or terrorism-related convictions.

Illegal Re-Entry in Context

Reentry cases make up the bulk of immigration sentencings in federal courts. In 2024, almost three out of four immigration cases involved people coming back after deportation, according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

Illegal reentry remains the dominant immigration offense in federal court. In fiscal year 2024, 72.4% of immigration cases sentenced involved reentry after deportation. (Source: U.S. Sentencing Commission, FY2024 Quick Facts)

Customs and Border Protection reported 17,048 criminal noncitizen arrests who had 20,926 prior convictions ranging from assault to drug offenses that same year.

Even with stiff penalties on the books, sentences have often been much lighter. 

In 2023, the average punishment for reentry was about a year in prison. Supporters of the new bill say that’s not enough to stop repeat offenders, and they see mandatory minimums as the answer.

Reentry cases also weigh heavily on the justice system. 

In recent years, reentry cases have accounted for close to a third of all federal prosecutions, with border districts carrying much of the weight, according to the American Immigration Council. The volume has strained prosecutors, judges, and defense attorneys. Backers of tougher penalties say longer sentences could cut down on repeat crossings and ease the pressure on the courts.

This debate isn’t new. 

After the 2015 killing of Kate Steinle in San Francisco, Congress considered Kate’s Law, which carried many of the same proposals. It failed in the Senate. Backers of H.R. 3486 say the problem has only grown more urgent since then.

Judicial Discretion and Sentencing

Under the bill, judges would have to impose minimum prison terms in certain reentry cases, instead of using discretion to hand down lighter sentences.

The Stop Illegal Entry Act of 2025 closes gaps that have let offenders return to U.S. communities with little consequence. 

Critics believe that mandatory minimums take away judicial flexibility, raise prison costs, and do little to address why people try to cross again.

National Security and Political Response

Strengthening penalties is also a national security issue. By guaranteeing prison time for reentry after aggravated felonies or terrorism-related convictions, the bill ensures dangerous offenders cannot easily slip back into U.S. communities.

Representative Jeff Crank of Colorado also emphasized the security angle, stating: “A country without border security cannot have national security.”

Speaker Mike Johnson praised the measure, declaring: “By targeting repeat offenders and imposing harsh penalties on violent felons who re-enter after deportation, this bill defends the rule of law and sends an unmistakable message: if you break our laws, there will be severe consequences.”

Rep. Stephanie Bice of Oklahoma, who introduced the legislation, added: “This legislation increases penalties for illegal aliens who re-enter the United States, as well as those in the United States who have committed felonies.”

Not all lawmakers agreed. 

Rep. Derek Tran of California opposed the bill, arguing: “This bill promotes racist tactics while doing nothing to increase meaningful enforcement of our immigration laws.” 

Critics of Tran’s view counter that there is nothing racist about strengthening penalties for illegal reentry after deportation — particularly when the bill is narrowly focused on repeat offenders and those with prior criminal convictions.

Looking Ahead

The Stop Illegal Entry Act of 2025 narrows in on one issue: punishing people who come back after deportation. It does not deal with detention, asylum, or parole. Lawmakers backing the bill say the goal is simple — raise the penalties, especially for those with criminal records, and make clear that crossing the border illegally will bring serious consequences.

Critics counter that the bill sidesteps the reasons people keep crossing and won’t solve the problem on its own.

The Senate debate will determine whether the rest of Congress follows through on making reentry penalties more certain and severe — or whether the judges will be allowed to use discretion with soft penalties.