Environment
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
StateNorth CarolinaIntroduced
HB 96: Expedited Removal of Unauthorized Persons.
Steve Tyson
HB 96 status: Introduced — Withdrawn From Com (updated Aug 31, 2026).
Source
OpenStates
Confidence
Low
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
01
What this bill does
Official summary alongside an AI-generated read on where it stands and why.
Overall Score
43OUT OF 100
Score:43/100 civic fit
Risk:High Risk
Impact:High Impact 75/100
Constitutionality20%
Bipartisan25%
Public opinion35%
Bill summary
What changes
The bill proposes to establish an expedited process for the removal of individuals deemed to lack legal authorization to be in the country.
Who is affected
Non-citizens or persons lacking legal documentation, landowners, law enforcement officers, judicial personnel, and businesses relying on immigrant labor.
Requirements and enforcement
Not stated in the available source; implied requirements would involve new administrative and enforcement pathways for local and state law enforcement.
Costs and funding
Not stated in the available source; expected significant costs associated with enforcement, legal challenges, and potential litigation.
When it takes effect
Not stated in the available source.
Potential benefits
Potential increased speed of removing individuals deemed unauthorized and clarity for property owners regarding trespass complaints.
Risks and tradeoffs
Significant concerns regarding due process, potential for racial profiling, and conflict with federal authority over immigration enforcement.
What is still unknown
The specific legal criteria for 'removal', the degree of due process afforded to individuals, and the specific impact on federal-state resource sharing.
02
Impact analysis
✦ AI analysisModeled effects across six domains, estimated from bill text and comparable legislation.
Economy
Critical outlook
40%
Benefits
- Enhanced enforcement of property rights for landowners
- Reduction in unauthorized use of private land
- Potential reduction in specific local resource demands
Risks
- Potential labor shortages in agriculture and retail sectors
- Increased compliance and legal costs for employers
- Disruption of local business supply chains reliant on immigrant labor
Society
Critical outlook
40%
Benefits
- Consistent application of state statutes regarding unauthorized persons
- Potential reduction in neighborhood trespass complaints
- Formalization of state-level responses to migration
Risks
- Increased risk of racial profiling and community distrust
- Potential for significant community and family instability
- Barriers to social service access for mixed-status families
Technology Industry
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Civic Accountability
Mixed / Neutral
45%
Benefits
- Clarified legal authority for law enforcement officers
- Codified procedures for judicial department processing
- Established state-level oversight of removal processes
Risks
- Potential for due process violations in expedited timelines
- Reduced judicial oversight for individual rights
- Significant administrative burden on the court system
Public Health & Safety
Mixed / Neutral
45%
Benefits
- Potentially faster response to trespassing on public facilities
- Centralization of safety-related removal protocols
- Addressing constituent requests for immediate police intervention
Risks
- Strained relationships between marginalized communities and police
- Potential decline in immigrant health-seeking behaviors
- Increased stress and mental health strain on impacted populations
03
How trustworthy & consequential it is
Sourcing already shown above, this is what the analysis found worth flagging.
Source
OpenStates
Official bill text or data from OpenStates.
Confidence
Low
Information is limited or incomplete.
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
Source used for this bill's analysis.
Source note
High risk of constitutional challenges regarding due process and potential conflict with federal immigration jurisdiction.
Analysis scope
Source provided is a brief abstract; lacks detailed bill text or legislative findings.
04
Where it stands
Official record- IntroducedCurrent
- CommitteeUpcoming
- Chamber votesUpcoming
- Final agreementUpcoming
- GovernorUpcoming
- EnactedUpcoming
05
How it affects your district
✦ Personalized
Set your location
Add your district to see how this bill may affect your community and who to contact.
Your Representatives
Your representatives appear here once you add your location.
06
Take action
Contact your representatives
Let them know how you feel about this bill.
Share your view
Join the discussion and see what others are saying.
Track this bill
Stay updated on progress and changes.