S. 3646 & H.R.7060 - No Political Enemies Act
S. 3646 was introduced on January 14, 2026 by Senator Christopher Murphey (D-CT). It is currently pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee and has 10 co-sponsors on a partyline basis.
H.R. 7060 was introduced on January 14, 2026 by Representative Jason Crow (D-CO-6). It is currently pending before the Committees on Judiciary, Oversight and Government Reform, and Ways and Means, and has 10 co-sponsor on a partyline basis.
Related legislation:
Bill Summary: S. 3646 and H.R. 7060 prohibits executive branch officials from initiating or directing investigations, enforcement actions, or other government actions against individuals or domestic entities when those actions are substantially motivated by constitutionally protected speech, expression, or political participation. The bill defines covered persons, officials, and actions, establishes a general prohibition on politically motivated targeting, and creates an affirmative defense allowing defendants to challenge enforcement actions on First Amendment grounds, shifting the burden to the government to prove legitimate, non-speech-related justification by clear and convincing evidence. It authorizes civil actions for injunctive relief and monetary damages against federal officials who knowingly engage in such conduct, limits official immunity, restricts federal indemnification, and allows courts to award uncapped attorneys’ fees and costs to prevailing parties. S. 3646 and H.R. 7060 bar the use of federal funds for politically motivated targeting and require regular Department of Justice (DOJ) reporting to Congress on sensitive investigations and enforcement matters, with severability protections included. In the case of a covered person being found to have been targeted for politically motivated speech, the bills amend the Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998 to provide no limit on an award to which an injured covered person can be awarded.
Context: S. 3646 and H.R. 7060 were introduced against a backdrop of heightened concern regarding prosecutorial overreach crossing the line between legitimate law enforcement and retaliation for constitutionally protected political expression. These bills seek to establish guardrails preventing federal officials from initiating investigations, prosecutions, or other coercive measures when such actions are substantially motivated by constitutionally protected speech, association, or political participation.
Recent cases involving political activists are illustrative of these concerns. Individuals such as Mahmoud Khalil, Yunseo Chung, and Rümeysa Öztürk engaged in public advocacy related to Palestinian human rights and self-determination, including protests and political speech that fall within the protections of the First Amendment. In these cases, immigration detention or removal proceedings were initiated following public political expression. Mr. Khalil continues to face potential deportation proceedings. Ms. Chung faced possible deportation until a federal judge issued an injunction in June 2025. Ms. Öztürk was detained for approximately six weeks before being released and continues to face potential deportation. These actions were substantially motivated by protected political speech rather than the breaking of American law.
Under S. 3646 and H.R. 7060, covered persons subject to enforcement actions that are substantially motivated by protected speech would be able to seek dismissal, injunctive relief, or damages, and the government would bear the burden of proving that such actions were not motivated by political expression. By creating explicit prohibitions, civil remedies, and reporting requirements, S. 3646 and H.R. 7060 aim to deter the use of federal power to suppress or punish protected political expression, particularly in contexts where prosecutorial discretion, national security claims, or immigration authorities afford wide latitude and limited contemporaneous judicial oversight.
American Values Analysis: The right to speak freely without fear of government retaliation is fundamental to a free society. As George Washington warned, “If men are to be precluded from offering their sentiments on a matter which may involve the most serious and alarming consequences that can invite the consideration of mankind, reason is of no use to us.” Speech that provokes discomfort, offense, or fear is as central to American democratic values as speech that affirms national identity or popular consensus. S. 3646 and H.R. 7060 seek to ensure that political expression, whether from the right or the left, is protected from politically motivated prosecution or enforcement.
American Interest Analysis: S. 3646 and H.R. 7060 reinforce congressional oversight over politically motivated prosecutions and enforcement actions that implicate constitutionally protected speech. By strengthening legal safeguards against executive overreach, the legislation promotes institutional accountability and reinforces the credibility of U.S. commitments to civil liberties. The bills also serve as an example of how democratic legal systems can protect political dissent while maintaining legitimate law enforcement authority.
A New Policy’s Recommendation: SUPPORT
A New Policy supports S. 3646 and H.R. 7060 because they respond to documented concerns about politically motivated enforcement actions against political advocates by strengthening legal protections for constitutionally protected speech and requiring the federal government to affirmatively demonstrate that its actions are not driven by political retaliation.
For more information please contact: Tariq Habash, (202) 770-0055, info@anewpolicy.org
