Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996

Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
Long title	Division C of "An Act making omnibus consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1997, and for other purposes".
Acronyms (colloquial)	IIRAIRA
Enacted by	the 104th United States Congress
Effective	April 1, 1997
Citations
Public law	Pub. L. 104–208 (text) (PDF)
Statutes at Large	110 Stat. 3009-546
Codification
Acts amended	Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996; Immigration and Nationality Technical Corrections Act of 1994; Immigration Act of 1990; Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988
Titles amended	8 U.S.C.: Aliens and Nationality
U.S.C. sections amended	8 U.S.C. ch. 12, subch. I § 1101 et seq.; 8 U.S.C. ch. 12, subch. II § 1221 et seq.; 8 U.S.C. ch. 12, subch. II § 1324; 8 U.S.C. ch. 12, subch. II § 1363a;
Legislative history
	Introduced in the House as H.R. 3610 by C. W. Bill Young (R-FL) on June 11, 1996; Committee consideration by House Appropriations, Senate Appropriations, House Judiciary; Passed the House on June 13, 1996 (278–126, Roll call vote 247, via Clerk.House.gov); Passed the Senate on July 18, 1996 (72–27, Roll call vote 200, via Senate.gov, in lieu of S. 1894); Reported by the joint conference committee on September 28, 1996; agreed to by the House on September 28, 1996 (370–37, Roll call vote 455, via Clerk.House.gov) and by the Senate on September 30, 1996 (Agreed voice vote); Signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 30, 1996;
United States Supreme Court cases
	List Immigration and Naturalization Service v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289 (2001); Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001); Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, 548 U.S. 30 (2006); Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012); Jennings v. Rodriguez, No. 15-1204, 583 U.S. ___ (2018); Pereira v. Sessions, No. 17-459, 585 U.S. ___ (2018); Nielsen v. Preap, No. 16-1363, 586 U.S. ___ (2019); Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, No. 19-161, 591 U.S. ___ (2020); Niz-Chavez v. Garland, No. 19-863, 593 U.S. ___ (2021); Johnson v. Guzman Chavez, No. 19-897, 594 U.S. ___ (2021); Patel v. Garland, No. 20-979, 596 U.S. ___ (2022); Garland v. Gonzalez, No. 20-322, 596 U.S. ___ (2022); Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez, No. 19-896, 596 U.S. ___ (2022); Biden v. Texas, No. 21-954, 597 U.S. ___ (2022); United States v. Texas, No. 22-58, 599 U.S. ___ (2023);

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRAIRA), is a law enacted as division C of the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997 that made major changes to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). IIRAIRA's changes became effective on April 1, 1997.

Former United States President Bill Clinton asserted that the legislation strengthened "the rule of law by cracking down on illegal immigration at the border, in the workplace, and in the criminal justice system — without punishing those living in the United States legally". However, IIRAIRA has been criticized as overly punitive by restricting "due process opportunities for certain classes of individuals in removal proceedings". A range of critiques have emerged concerning the provisions enacted with IIRAIRA, such as the expansion of aggravated felonies, creation of the 287(g) program, reduction in due process rights, and intensified funding of border militarization. With IIRAIRA, all aliens, regardless of legal status and including long-term legal permanent residents, became subject to removal and greatly expanded the offenses that could lead to formal deportation.

Proponents of the IIRAIRA present the case that the policy provided a much needed end to numerous loopholes present beforehand in US immigration policy, which ultimately undermined their efficacy. The ultimate goal of the IIRAIRA has been to deter further illegal immigration into the US, and despite a noticeable increase in annual deportations since the policy was enacted in 1996 from around 50,000 to over 200,000 by the beginning of the 2000s, overall illegal immigration has increased since the policy's enactment according to data compiled by the Pew Research Center.

Before IIRAIRA, nonimmigrants who overstayed their visas or violated their status could pay a fine that would allow them to adjust their status to permanent residence status. With IIRAIRA, however, lawfully admitted nonimmigrants who overstay their visas by one day or longer became ineligible for a new nonimmigrant visa. If the period of overstay ranged from 180 to 365 days, the alien would face a 3-year bar to reentry, and an overstay of more than 365 days would require a 10-year bar. These provisions impact aliens who were admitted before and after the enactment of IIRAIRA. In these circumstances, an alien who falls under these categories would be subject to summary removal if attempting to reenter the United States. In these removal proceedings, the alien does not have a right to a hearing or a lawyer and is subject to a 5-year bar of entry.