The Republican-led House and Senate are currently pushing forward legislation that would shift certain federal immigration enforcement duties to state authorities, indicating a potential tightening of immigration detention policies.
The House recently approved the Laken Riley Act on Tuesday, with backing from 216 Republicans and 48 Democrats. The bill is now under Senate review, where it has surprisingly garnered some Democratic support. Senators John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Ruben Gallego of Arizona are among those co-sponsoring its Senate version. Discussions in the Senate are scheduled to continue on Monday.
Among the bill’s significant provisions, it would require immigration officers to detain undocumented immigrants accused of petty theft involving sums of $100 or more. Additionally, it would greatly expand the power of state attorneys general over federal immigration policies, allowing them to sue the federal government to enforce the detention of specific individuals and to urge the State Department to deny visas to countries that refuse to accept deported individuals.
The eight-page legislation 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 had been in the U.S. illegally and had previously been released by Border Patrol. Ibarra received a life sentence without the possibility of parole for the crime.
Now, let’s explore the details of this bill.
Mandatory Detention for Immigrants Accused of Theft
If signed into law by the incoming President Trump, this legislation would alter the federal government’s stance on undocumented immigrants facing theft charges of $100 or more, which could encompass shoplifting incidents. The bill requires the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to ensure that individuals charged with theft are detained, obligating immigration officials to arrest and hold these individuals.
At present, immigration authorities tend to focus on detaining individuals with violent criminal backgrounds. However, this bill would eliminate that leeway. “This legislation complicates the everyday operations of ICE,” remarked Jason Houser, who served as chief of staff for Immigration and Customs Enforcement from 2021 to 2023. He pointed out that the federal government is currently funded to detain around 41,000 individuals, but the new bill could increase that capacity by up to 20,000, diverting resources from apprehending violent offenders. “If this bill is enacted, we might see a decline in the number of violent offenders in detention compared to the current situation.”
Additionally, the legislation would influence legal immigration procedures. It mandates that Customs and Border Protection officers label individuals as “inadmissible” to the U.S. if they are arrested for theft or admit to shoplifting. Consequently, a holder of a valid visa could be deported without the chance to defend themselves against such claims in court.
Empowering State Attorneys General to Sue for Detention
The proposed legislation would grant state attorneys general the authority to sue the federal government regarding its treatment of undocumented immigrants in custody. State officials could petition courts to instruct immigration agents to locate and detain individuals previously released from custody. “This allows state attorneys general to seek injunctive relief against the Secretary of Homeland Security when federal immigration actions—like parole or violations 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 granted the President and federal authorities considerable power over immigration issues. This bill would alter that dynamic, providing state attorneys general the ability to contest federal immigration decisions. Critics argue that many proponents of the bill may not fully grasp the extensive ramifications of this shift. “We believe it’s unwise to undermine our system of federal supremacy by empowering state attorneys general over the decisions made by individual ICE and CBP agents, as well as those reaching up to the Secretary of State,” cautioned Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council.
State Officials Could Impact Visa Issuance for Non-Compliant Nations
Furthermore, the legislation would allow states to influence U.S. foreign policy. Some undocumented immigrants remain in the U.S. because their home countries refuse to accept their deportation. Nations 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 assert that state attorneys general should be able to sue the State Department to stop the issuance of U.S. visas to countries that do not cooperate with the deportation of their nationals. “This effectively places the immigration and visa processes under judicial and state authority,” stated Reichlin-Melnick.
Congressional Backing for the Legislation
The House successfully passed the bill with unanimous support from Republican members and backing from 48 out of 215 Democrats. In the Senate, where a 60-vote threshold is necessary to begin debate, 31 Democrats joined all Senate Republicans in promoting the bill. Only nine Democrats opposed it. Alongside Senators Fetterman and Gallego, several other Democratic Senators, including 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 remarked that he voted to advance the bill to allow for debate and potential amendments aimed at modifying its provisions. Senate Majority Leader John Thune will oversee which amendments will be considered before the final vote occurs. If the bill reaches the White House in its existing form, President-elect Donald Trump is anticipated to sign it into law when he assumes office.
