The Republican-controlled House and Senate are pushing ahead with a law designed to cede some federal immigration enforcement power to the states and usher in a harsher new era of immigration detention.
The Laken Riley Act passed the House on Tuesday with support from 216 Republicans and 48 Democrats. The Senate is considering the legislation, which has drawn an unusual amount of support from Democratic Senators. Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman and Arizona Senator Ruben Gallego, both Democrats, have co-sponsored the Senate version of the bill. The Senate could bring the bill to a full vote as soon as Friday.
The measure’s lead provisions would force immigration officers to arrest and detain immigrants in the country unlawfully who are suspected of minor theft of $100 or more. The bill would also greatly expand the power that state attorney generals have over federal immigration policy, allowing state officials to sue the federal government to have specific immigrants detained and force the State Department to block visas from countries that won’t take back individuals being deported.
The 8-page bill is named for Laken Riley, a 22-year-old nursing student who was murdered last year in Athens, Georgia by Jose Ibarra, a Venezuelan immigrant who was in the country unlawfully and had been previously apprehended by Border Patrol and released. Ibarra was sentenced in November to life in prison without parole for Riley’s killing.
Here’s a look at what’s in the bill.
Mandatory custody for immigrants suspected of theft
If the bill passes and incoming President Trump signs it into law, it would change how the federal government handles immigrants who are in the country unlawfully and suspected of stealing something worth $100 or more, a relatively minor infraction that would include cases of shoplifting. The bill requires the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security “to take into custody aliens who have been charged in the United States with theft, and for other purposes,” meaning immigration officers would be required to arrest and detain those people.
Currently, immigration officials use their discretion to first detain people with violent criminal records. But the law would override that discretion. “This bill hinders the work ICE does day to day,” said Jason Houser, who was chief of staff for Immigration and Customs Enforcement from 2021 to 2023. The federal government has enough funding to pay for housing about 41,000 people in immigration detention. Houser estimates that the bill would add another 20,000 people to immigration detention and would require federal agencies to divert manpower from finding the most violent and dangerous offenders. “If passed, you will see less individuals in detention who are violent convicted criminals than you see today.”
The bill also would impact legal immigration. The legislation instructs Customs and Border Protection officers to consider a person “inadmissible” to the U.S. if they are arrested for, or admit to, committing acts that constitute theft or shoplifting. That would mean someone with a valid visa to be in the U.S. could be removed before they had a chance to defend themselves from such charges in front of a judge.
State attorneys general could sue to have immigrants detained
The bill gives state attorneys general the power to sue the federal government over its handling of undocumented people in its custody. The state officials would be able to demand a court instruct immigration agents to track down and arrest people it had released from immigration detention. “It allows state attorneys general to sue the Secretary of Homeland Security for injunctive relief if immigration actions such as parole, violation of detention requirements, or other policy failures harm that state or its citizens,” said Rep. Mike Collins, the Republican congressman from Georgia who introduced the bill in the House.
For most of U.S. history, courts have given the President and the federal government broad authority over immigration decisions. This bill would reverse that, giving state attorneys general the ability to override immigration decisions made by federal officials. Critics of the bill argue some supporters of the bill haven’t properly considered the sweeping ramifications of that change. “We don’t think it makes sense to invert our system of federal supremacy and give state attorneys general the power to superintend the decisions of individual line officers working at ICE and CBP and decisions all the way up to the Secretary of State,” says Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council.
State officials could demand the State Department stop issuing visas from countries that don’t accept people being deported
The bill would also give states power to insert themselves into U.S. foreign policy. One reason immigrants found in the country illegally aren’t deported is because their home country won’t accept them. Nicaragua, Honduras, Brazil, India, Russia, and Democratic Republic of the Congo are among the countries currently unwilling to accept people being deported from the U.S.
Supporters of the bill want state attorneys general to be able to sue the State Department to require no U.S. visas be issued for any country refusing to accept the deportation of their nationals. “You’re putting the immigration process, the visa process in the hands of the courts and the states,” Reichlin-Melnick said.
Who supports the bill in Congress?
The bill passed the House with unanimous support from Republicans, and the backing of 48 of 215 Democrats. In the Senate, where there is a 60-vote threshold to begin debate on the bill, 31 Democrats joined all Senate Republicans to move the bill forward. Only nine Democrats were opposed. In addition to Senators Fetterman and Gallego co-sponsoring the bill, other Democratic Senators have said they plan to support the bill, including Senators Mark Kelly of Arizona, Gary Peters of Michigan, Jacky Rosen of Nevada, and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said he voted yes to advance the bill in order to have debate and offer amendments to change the bill’s provisions. Senate Majority Leader John Thune will decide which amendments are considered before bringing the bill to a vote for final passage. If the bill makes it to the White House in its current form, President-elect Donald Trump would likely sign it into law when he takes office.
