Rep. Chip Roy is now reportedly preparing to introduce a far-reaching piece of legislation that would significantly expand the federal government’s ability to deny entry to, remove, or strip citizenship from non-citizens based on their political and ideological affiliations.
The proposal, dubbed the “MAMDANI Act” after New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, takes aim at a range of ideologies the bill characterizes as “totalitarian.” According to draft text first reported by Breitbart, the measure would make individuals inadmissible to the United States if they advocate for or are affiliated with movements such as Chinese communism, Marxism, or Islamic fundamentalism.
The legislation would go beyond entry restrictions. It seeks to amend existing immigration law to bar naturalization and establish new grounds for deportation, potentially applying not only to foreign nationals but also to individuals already living in the United States. The scope of the proposal is broad, covering affiliations with both foreign and domestic political movements.
Perhaps most striking, the bill includes a provision that would block judicial review of decisions made under its key enforcement mechanisms. That means determinations regarding inadmissibility, deportation, or denaturalization could become effectively final, raising the stakes for those affected and potentially limiting avenues for legal challenge.
Under the proposed framework, enforcement could extend to individuals who engage in advocacy tied to the specified ideologies—or even those who have done so in the past. The bill also outlines penalties for those who “write, distribute, circulate, print, display, possess, or publish” materials supporting such beliefs, signaling an aggressive approach to ideological activity.
Roy, speaking about the proposal, framed it as a response to long-standing concerns about immigration policy. He argued that the United States has, for decades, allowed in individuals who harbor hostility toward the country and its foundational principles. According to Roy, this approach has had consequences not only for economic competitiveness but also for the nation’s ideological cohesion.
“This has not just led to higher crime and lower wages, but also the promulgation of hostile ideologies fundamentally opposed to American values,” Roy said, outlining the rationale behind the legislation.
He further described the bill as an effort to counter what he called a “Red-Green Alliance,” referring to a perceived convergence between Marxist and Islamist movements. Roy said the proposal is designed to provide new tools to push back against what he views as a growing ideological threat, one he claims has already had significant impacts in Europe.
A summary circulated by Roy’s office, also cited in the report, argues that current immigration policies—particularly family-based migration and diversity programs—have contributed to what it calls “dangerous levels” of opposition to traditional American political doctrines, including free-market capitalism.
The summary specifically points to figures like Mamdani as evidence, asserting that the existing system enables the entry and rise of individuals who promote Marxist or Islamist ideas.
While supporters may see the measure as a forceful defense of national identity and security, its sweeping scope and lack of judicial review suggest it could ignite a fierce debate over civil liberties, the role of ideology in immigration enforcement, and how far the government should go in policing beliefs—especially at a time when global conflicts and ideological tensions are already running high.
