This bill would direct the Department of Homeland Security, through U.S. Customs and Border Protection, to deploy large-scale non-intrusive inspection technology at land ports of entry identified as high risk. In practice, that means more advanced scanning and imaging systems to inspect vehicles, cargo, and other crossings without opening them by hand. The measure is aimed at strengthening border security, detecting smuggling, and speeding lawful commerce and travel at the busiest or most vulnerable crossings. It would primarily affect CBP operations, border communities, travelers, and freight carriers that rely on land ports of entry.
What This Bill Does
- Directs DHS and CBP to implement large-scale non-intrusive inspection technology
- Applies to land ports of entry identified as high risk
- Targets inspection of vehicles and cargo without manual opening or dismantling
- Focuses on border security, smuggling detection, and faster lawful processing
Who This Bill Affects
If you live near a land border, work in freight or logistics, or regularly cross at a port of entry, this bill could mean more high-tech screening at selected crossings. That may improve security and, at some locations, reduce delays from manual inspections, but it could also lead to new operational changes during deployment and upkeep. For most other Americans, the effect would be indirect: potentially fewer illicit goods entering the country and smoother border processing of lawful trade.
See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysisWho Supports & Opposes This
- Border security officials They are likely to favor the bill because advanced scanning equipment can help detect drugs, weapons, and concealed contraband more efficiently than manual inspections. The technology can also give officers better targeting tools at congested crossings.
- Freight carriers and importers They may support the bill if it reduces inspection bottlenecks and shortens wait times at busy ports of entry. Faster screening can lower shipping delays, reduce fuel costs, and improve reliability for cross-border commerce.
- Border communities and local economies They may see value in technologies that ease congestion while maintaining enforcement. Better throughput at ports can help local commerce, commuting, and tourism in regions that depend on steady border traffic.
- Fiscal conservatives They may oppose the bill if they view it as an expensive federal technology mandate without a clear funding plan or measurable performance guarantees. They could argue that purchasing and maintaining large-scale inspection systems creates ongoing costs for DHS.
- Civil liberties advocates They may worry that more automated inspection infrastructure expands surveillance at ports of entry and increases the collection of data on travelers and commercial actors. Concerns may also arise about false positives or overreliance on technology in enforcement decisions.
- Small border businesses and local operators They may be concerned that implementation could initially slow traffic, disrupt routine operations, or shift enforcement burdens onto local stakeholders. If rollout is uneven, smaller operators may face compliance and scheduling challenges before benefits appear.
Key Implications
-
“"implement large-scale, non-intrusive inspection technology"”
This points to scanning systems that examine vehicles and cargo without full manual inspection. In practice, that can speed up processing while still giving CBP more detailed security screening.
-
“"at land ports of entry identified as high risk"”
The requirement is not nationwide for every crossing; it is aimed at ports that DHS considers especially vulnerable. That means the biggest changes would be felt at selected border crossings with heavy traffic or elevated enforcement concerns.
-
“"acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection"”
CBP would be the operational agency responsible for putting the technology in place. That makes the bill about border operations and procurement, not just a policy statement.
-
“"and for other purposes"”
This standard legislative phrase signals that related border-security or implementation provisions could accompany the main inspection mandate. In practical terms, it leaves room for additional administrative details to be included as the bill moves forward.
Official Source & Bill Facts
BillBoard checks this page against public Congress.gov metadata, then adds plain-English analysis where available.
- Bill
- HR 9565
- Congress
- 119th Congress
- Official title
- To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to direct the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, to implement large-scale, non-intrusive inspection technology at land ports of entry identified as high risk, and for other purposes.
- Policy area
- Immigration
- Latest action
- Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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. (June 30, 2026)
- Last updated
- July 1, 2026
Latest Status
June 30, 2026
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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.
Related Bills
Take Action
Get more from BillBoard
Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.
Ask AI about this billData sourced from api.congress.gov.