A heated debate unfolded during a congressional hearing on Tuesday, as a Democratic congressman proposed renaming a Republican-backed animal cruelty bill to the “Kristi Noem Canine Relief Act of 2025.” The original legislation, known as House Resolution 4638, seeks to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, making any foreign national who harms service animals inadmissible to the United States or subject to deportation.
The bill, formally titled the “Bill to Outlaw Wounding of Official Working Animals Act,” was sponsored by Congressman Ken Calver and has garnered support from over a dozen Republican co-sponsors. The legislation was prompted by an incident at Washington Dulles International Airport, where an Egyptian man kicked a Customs and Border Protection dog named Freddie while attempting to smuggle more than 50 pounds of various food products into the country. Freddie, a five-year-old beagle, suffered bruised ribs and required two weeks for recovery.
During the hearing, Democrats expressed concerns that the proposed law could impose penalties on individuals who have not been convicted of any crime. They highlighted that the individual involved in Freddie’s case had already been jailed and deported under existing laws. Congressman Dan Goldman leveraged the opportunity to question the implications of the bill, referencing an incident from Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem’s book where she described shooting and killing a young dog.
“Make no mistake. I am strongly against anyone assaulting dogs,” Goldman stated. He further queried, “Is it only at the ports of entry or is this just broadly against any assault on dogs?” His comments sought to underline the potential contradictions within the bill regarding its application to cabinet members who have admitted to harming animals.
Another Democratic congressman, Jared Moskowitz, joined the critique by reading excerpts from Noem’s book, emphasizing the emotional weight of the narrative surrounding animal welfare. Moskowitz urged the committee to recognize the name of the dog involved, stating, “That puppy had a name. Say its name — Cricket.”
In contrast, Republican Congressman Lance Gooden responded with humor, employing dog-themed puns to critique the Democrats. He referred to Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett as “all bark and no bite” and suggested that Moskowitz was “fetching amendments.”
The proposal to rename the bill was ultimately rejected along party lines, and the legislation moved forward in the committee with a party-line vote. Following the hearing, the House Judiciary Committee’s Republican members issued a statement claiming, “Democrats just voted to allow illegal aliens to kick dogs. Republicans wanted to deport illegal aliens for kicking dogs. Guess Dems hate man’s best friend!”
This incident reflects the ongoing tensions within Congress regarding immigration and animal rights, showcasing differing priorities between the two parties. As discussions continue, the future of animal welfare legislation and its implications for immigration policy remains a contentious topic in the political arena.
