Part ofimmigration →

HR7836FEDERALin_committee

High Impact

Real Courts, Rule of Law Act of 2026

March 5, 2026

immigration judiciary court reform government structure

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Where This Stands

Introduced

Committee

Floor Vote

Passed

Signed

Currently in_committee. The next step in the legislative lifecycle is Floor Vote.

Last action

Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.Mar 5, 2026

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

The Frame

What this does

If passed, this bill would fundamentally change the immigration legal system by removing it from the Department of Justice's control and creating an independent court system, which would alter how immigration cases are processed and how judges are appointed.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

Immigration Judges

Their appointment process, term lengths, and administrative oversight structure would change under the new court system.

Department of Justice

The agency would lose its current administrative control over the immigration court system.

Immigration Litigants

Individuals appearing before immigration courts would have their cases heard by a newly structured, independent judicial body.

What changed

Current stage: in_committee.

What's next

Floor Vote.

Summary

This bill proposes moving immigration courts out of the executive branch and establishing them as an independent system of courts under Article I of the Constitution. It creates a new structure consisting of appellate, trial, and administrative divisions with judges appointed to 15-year terms.

Key Facts

Establishes the United States Immigration Courts as an independent Article I court system, separate from the executive branch.
Creates three divisions: an appellate division, a trial division, and an administrative division.
Sets the appellate division to be composed of 21 immigration appeals judges appointed by the President with Senate confirmation.
Establishes 15-year terms for both immigration appeals judges and immigration trial judges.
Requires the appellate division to act en banc (as a full body) for non-adjudicative matters like appointing trial judges or setting court rules.
Mandates that the principal office of the new court system be located in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area.
Authorizes immigration trial judges to be appointed by the appellate division rather than the President.
Provides that judges not reappointed may continue to serve for up to one year after their term expires or until a successor is appointed.
Defines a quorum for the appellate division as the greater of three judges or two-thirds of the judges in active service.

Why It Matters

Frequently Asked Questions

Will immigration courts still be part of the Department of Justice?

No. The bill explicitly states that the new Immigration Courts will be independent of the executive branch.

How long will immigration judges serve?

Both appellate and trial immigration judges will serve 15-year terms and are eligible for reappointment.

Who appoints the judges?

Appellate judges are appointed by the President with Senate confirmation, while trial judges are appointed by the appellate division of the court.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift100% confidence

Judicial Independence Shift

The bill represents a significant attempt to move immigration adjudication from an executive agency (DOJ) to an independent Article I court system.

United States Immigration Courts

Connected Entities

personMr. Raskin“Co-sponsor of the bill.”Map →

personMs. Lofgren“Primary sponsor of the bill.”Map →

personMr. Johnson of Georgia“Co-sponsor of the bill.”Map →

personMr. Goldman of New York“Co-sponsor of the bill.”Map →

Analysis Score

0–100

Significance90
How much this matters to a regular citizen
Controversy85
Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
Entertainment20
Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
Buzz40
Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools