We’re going to propose and move forward on ... increasing the penalties for illegal entry and re-entry.
Increase penalties for illegal entry and re-entry into the United States.
Occurrences
Evidence
The article says Schmitt promoted a bill he called the Protect America Act, arguing it would crack down on illegal immigration, support law enforcement, and restore order.
The enrolled bill became law and required detention of certain noncitizens charged with theft, burglary, larceny, shoplifting, assault on law enforcement, or crimes causing death or serious bodily injury.
The bill text appropriates DHS, CBP, and ICE funding through September 30, 2029, including immigration enforcement operations and a covered-unlawful-alien definition that references offenses under 8 U.S.C. 1325 and 1326. It does not amend the criminal penalty provisions in 8 U.S.C. 1325 or 1326.
The Senate passed S. 2 by 52-47 on June 5, 2026; Schmitt is recorded as voting Yea. The measure title is reconciliation pursuant to S. Con. Res. 33, matching the Secure America Act text.
Reporting says President Trump signed the Secure America Act on June 10, 2026, allocating funding to ICE, CBP, and DHS through September 2029. The described provisions concern funding and immigration-law enforcement, not criminal penalty increases for unlawful entry or reentry.
The official U.S. Code entry lists existing improper-entry penalties: up to 6 months for a first offense, up to 2 years for a subsequent offense, plus specified civil penalties. The amendment notes do not show a recent Schmitt-era penalty increase.
The official U.S. Code entry lists existing reentry penalties: generally up to 2 years, with higher maxima for specified prior criminal or removal histories. The amendment notes do not show a recent Schmitt-era penalty increase.
Assessments
The cited federal evidence shows Schmitt supported and promoted immigration-enforcement measures, including funding, detention, and sanctuary-city related efforts, but none amended 8 U.S.C. 1325 or 1326 or otherwise increased criminal penalties for illegal entry or illegal re-entry. Because the promised penalty increase was not enacted and the evidence does not show a serious Schmitt-backed legislative attempt specifically targeting those penalties, this is not delivered and does not merit an effort badge.
The cited later-term federal actions do not deliver the promised outcome. The Laken Riley Act increased detention requirements for certain noncitizens accused of other crimes, but it did not raise criminal penalties for illegal entry or illegal re-entry. The separate evidence that Schmitt promoted a broader immigration enforcement bill also does not show enactment, sponsorship success, or a specific penalty increase for entry or re-entry offenses. On this record, there is no delivered policy change matching the promise, and the evidence of effort is not specific enough to count as a serious failed attempt on the exact promise.