The Republican-led House and Senate are currently pushing forward legislation that seeks to shift specific federal immigration enforcement duties to state governments. This move indicates a potential tightening of immigration detention policies.
Recently, the House passed the Laken Riley Act, receiving backing from 216 Republicans and 48 Democrats. The bill is now under review in the Senate, where it has surprisingly gained traction among some Democratic Senators, including Pennsylvania’s John Fetterman and Arizona’s Ruben Gallego, who are co-sponsoring the Senate version. The Senate plans to resume discussions on this legislation on Monday.
Among the bill’s significant provisions, it requires immigration officers to detain undocumented immigrants who are suspected of minor theft offenses involving amounts of $100 or more. Furthermore, the legislation would greatly expand the powers of state attorneys general concerning federal immigration policies, allowing them to sue the federal government to mandate the detention of certain immigrants and to urge the State Department to withhold visas from countries that refuse to accept deported individuals.
The eight-page bill is named after Laken Riley, a 22-year-old nursing student who was tragically murdered last year in Athens, Georgia, by Jose Ibarra, a Venezuelan immigrant who was in the U.S. unlawfully and had been previously apprehended by Border Patrol but later released. Ibarra has received a life sentence without parole for Riley’s murder.
Let’s take a closer look at the details of the bill.
Mandatory Detention for Immigrants Accused of Theft
If this bill is enacted and signed by the incoming President Trump, it would alter the federal government’s strategy regarding undocumented immigrants accused of theft valued at $100 or more, including cases of shoplifting. The bill obligates the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to ensure that individuals charged with theft are detained, meaning immigration officials would be required to arrest and hold these individuals.
Currently, immigration officials often focus on detaining individuals with histories of violent crime. However, this legislation would strip them of that discretion. Jason Houser, a former chief of staff for Immigration and Customs Enforcement from 2021 to 2023, noted that while the federal government is funded to detain around 41,000 individuals, this bill could increase that capacity by an additional 20,000, potentially diverting resources from capturing serious offenders. “If this bill is approved, we might end up having fewer violent criminals in detention than we currently do,” he stated.
Furthermore, the legislation would also impact legal immigration procedures. It mandates that Customs and Border Protection officers classify individuals as “inadmissible” to the U.S. if they are arrested for or confess to theft or shoplifting. This means a person with a valid visa could be expelled from the country without the chance to defend against such claims in court.
Empowering State Attorneys General to Sue for Detention
The bill would grant state attorneys general the authority to take legal action against the federal government regarding the treatment of undocumented individuals in custody. State officials could request that courts direct immigration agents to locate and detain individuals who had been previously released. “This allows state attorneys general to seek court orders against the Secretary of Homeland Security if federal immigration decisions—like parole or breaches of detention protocols—adversely affect that state or its residents,” explained Rep. Mike Collins, the Georgia Republican who introduced the bill in the House.
Traditionally, the courts have allowed the President and federal authorities considerable control over immigration issues. This bill would shift some of that authority, enabling state attorneys general to contest federal immigration choices. Critics argue that many supporters of the bill might not fully grasp the far-reaching implications of this change. “We believe granting state attorneys general authority over the decisions made by individual ICE and CBP officers, and even those reaching up to the Secretary of State, undermines the principle of federal supremacy,” remarked Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council.
State Officials Could Influence Visa Issuance for Non-Compliant Countries
Additionally, this legislation would enable states to intervene in U.S. foreign policy. One reason some undocumented immigrants are not deported is that their home countries refuse to accept them. Countries like Nicaragua, Honduras, Brazil, India, Russia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo currently do not accept deportees from the U.S.
Supporters of the bill aim to empower state attorneys general to sue the State Department to prevent the issuance of U.S. visas to countries that do not comply with the deportation of their nationals. “This effectively places the immigration and visa processes under judicial and state authority,” stated Reichlin-Melnick.
Congressional Support for the Bill
The House approved the bill with unanimous support from Republican members and 48 out of 215 Democrats. In the Senate, where a 60-vote threshold is required to initiate debate, 31 Democrats joined all Senate Republicans in backing the bill. Only nine Democrats opposed it. In addition to Senators Fetterman and Gallego co-sponsoring the bill, several other Democratic Senators, such as Mark Kelly of Arizona, Gary Peters of Michigan, Jacky Rosen of Nevada, and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, have voiced their intention to support the legislation.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer stated he voted in favor of advancing the bill to enable debate and possible amendments aimed at modifying its provisions. Senate Majority Leader John Thune is responsible for deciding which amendments will be considered before the final vote. If the bill reaches the White House in its current form, President-elect Donald Trump is anticipated to sign it into law once he takes office.
