WASHINGTON — On Thursday, the Senate is set to vote on commencing discussions on the Laken Riley Act, a Republican-sponsored bill focused on addressing illegal immigration. The bill has garnered considerable support from Democrats, who are expected to provide sufficient votes to surpass the 60-vote threshold in the Senate controlled by the GOP. However, there are indications that Democrats may seek to modify the bill, raising uncertainty about its final approval.
Senator Raphael Warnock of Georgia announced his intention to support the initiation of debates on the Laken Riley Act, emphasizing the importance of addressing the issues within the legislation as desired by the people of Georgia. While he did not commit to endorsing the bill in its current form, Warnock expressed readiness for bipartisan discussions to address immigration challenges and enhance safety measures.
The Democrats’ willingness to consider backing the bill reflects a shift in their approach to immigration policy following electoral setbacks. In the 2024 election, voters favored Donald Trump over Kamala Harris in handling immigration by a significant margin, highlighting the political impact of the issue. The Laken Riley Act proposes amendments to federal law, mandating Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to detain individuals involved in theft-related offenses, such as shoplifting, if they are in the country unlawfully.
Furthermore, the bill empowers state attorneys general to take legal action against the federal government for alleged lapses in immigration enforcement resulting in harm exceeding $100 to states or their residents. Named after Laken Riley, a young nursing student tragically killed by an undocumented immigrant in 2024, the legislation passed the House with bipartisan support and now faces Senate deliberations.
As the Senate convenes to consider the bill, Democrats from competitive states or border regions, including Senators from Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Nevada, have voiced their backing for the Laken Riley Act. Their support indicates a willingness to engage in conversations to enhance the bill through amendments and ensure its effectiveness in addressing immigration challenges.
Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, expressed his concerns about the current draft of the legislation, stating, “The underlying bill looks like a not well-constructed piece of legislation. But we could potentially make it better.” One Senate aide revealed that Democrats are contemplating amending the bill’s language to narrow the criteria that trigger Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention of an undocumented individual. Presently, the bill encompasses anyone who is “charged with, arrested for, convicted of, admits having committed, or admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of any burglary, theft, larceny, or shoplifting offense.”
“We’re looking to refine it to ensure that it more accurately targets individuals engaged in criminal activity, rather than potentially being misused for other purposes,” the aide emphasized. Democrats are committed to engaging in a thorough process to enhance the bill, with a focus on practical improvements rather than unrealistic demands.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York indicated to his fellow Democrats that he is open to allowing the bill to proceed, enabling Democrats to propose amendments. Responding to a growing sentiment within his conference, Schumer acknowledged the willingness of some members to either support the bill outright or engage in negotiations to enhance its provisions. If the Senate does introduce amendments, the bill will need to return to the House for final approval.
A Senate Democratic aide noted that the party has been receptive to discussions on strengthening border security laws, aligning with the evolving preferences of voters. “This reflects the ongoing shift in public opinion, and responsible elected officials are attuned to these changes,” the aide remarked.
Some advocates for pro-immigration policies are urging Democrats to remove a provision from the bill that allows state attorneys general to sue the federal government, cautioning that it could be exploited by malicious actors. Kerri Talbot, executive director at the Immigration Hub and former counsel to Senate Democrats, highlighted concerns about the bill’s constitutionality and the potential repercussions for established immigrant communities. Talbot emphasized the risks associated with empowering state officials like Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to target immigrant families.
In addition to the proposed Laken Riley Act, Republicans are planning to introduce several immigration-related bills in both the House and Senate to address border security concerns promptly and compel Democrats to take decisive stances. A second Democratic aide observed a shift in the political landscape regarding immigration issues, noting that advocacy groups have historically influenced Democrats to adopt more progressive positions. However, recent electoral outcomes have underscored the importance of prioritizing public safety and addressing criminal behavior, even if it means deporting undocumented individuals convicted of crimes.
The debate surrounding the legislation underscores the complex nature of immigration policy and the divergent perspectives within the political spectrum. As lawmakers navigate these intricate discussions, the ultimate goal remains finding a balanced approach that upholds national security while safeguarding the rights and well-being of immigrant populations within the United States.
