Senate Democrats, including representatives from Pennsylvania and Delaware, on Thursday overwhelmingly supported GOP passage of a bill aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, Democratic senators from New Jersey were among nine members who voted against it.
The bill, which would require federal authorities to detain undocumented immigrants arrested for theft-related crimes, was the first to be voted on by the newly established Republican-controlled Senate.
Lawmakers named the legislation after Laken Riley, a 22-year-old nursing student at Augusta University who was murdered while jogging at the University of Georgia. Her convicted killer, Jose Ibarra, came to the United States illegally and was released early after being arrested for stealing merchandise from a Walmart store. In November, he was sentenced to life in prison without parole.
Riley’s tragic murder became a flashpoint in the 2024 presidential campaign, when President-elect Donald Trump and his allies said they would fight illegal immigration.
The Senate voted 84-9 to begin debate on the bill, which is still subject to amendment and will have to go to a final vote. Still, Democrats’ wide margin of support reflects how the party is re-examining its stance on immigration, which played a key role in the presidential campaign in Pennsylvania and nationally.
Sen. John Fetterman was originally the bill’s sole Democratic co-sponsor, which eventually attracted additional Democratic co-sponsors before gaining overwhelming Democratic support.
» READ MORE: Fetterman is a co-sponsor of Laken Riley’s GOP-led bill and is one of the few Democrats to support it
“Laken Riley’s story is a tragic reminder of what is at stake when our systems fail to protect people,” Fetterman said in a statement earlier this week. “…Immigration makes our country great. I support giving authorities the tools to prevent such tragedies as we work towards comprehensive solutions to our broken system.
Pennsylvania Senator Dave McCormick also co-sponsored the bill, which was the first to pass in the new Congress.
“I am proud that my first vote in the United States Senate was in support of the Laken Riley Act,” McCormick said in a statement. “…This commonsense bill gives the Department of Homeland Security the authority and strength it needs to keep our communities safe.”
Laken Riley’s bill passed the House of Representatives on Tuesday with the support of 48 Democrats, including U.S. Reps. Brendan Boyle (R-Philadelphia) and Chris Deluzio (R-Allegheny).
Sense. Delaware’s Lisa Blunt Rochester and Chris Coons voted to bring the legislation up for debate in the Senate, although both said they wanted it amended.
“Senator Blunt Rochester has his concerns, but supports moving forward with the full amendment process if it gets us closer to finding a comprehensive, bipartisan solution to immigration reform,” the spokesman said.
Coons’ spokesman said the senator looks forward to a “robust amendment process.”
In addition to requiring federal detention of illegal immigrants arrested for theft, the bill would allow states to sue the Department of Homeland Security for harm to their citizens as a result of illegal immigration, greatly expanding the power of state attorneys general.
Immigrant advocacy groups have warned that the bill does not provide due process for people accused of crimes because any illegal immigrant arrested for theft, as minor as shoplifting, will be detained by ICE and could face deportation. Giving states the power to sue the federal government could also threaten the federal government’s constitutional role in overseeing immigration policy.
Booker and Kim vote no.
New Jersey Sens. Cory Booker and Andy Kim, both Democrats, were among the nine “no” votes on the bill.
“We should all fully agree that people convicted of crimes face consequences, and the law already states that illegal immigrants convicted of crimes face detention and deportation,” Kim said.
“But ordering the detention of people charged before they go to court, before our judicial system is contrary to our constitution,” Kim said, adding that he “urgently supports [taking] bipartisan action to fix our broken immigration system.”
Booker said in a statement that the bill does not offer solutions to immigration or public safety and instead “aims to scapegoat and intimidate immigrant communities.” “It would dramatically expand mandatory detention of people not convicted of any crime and encourage state and local law enforcement to profile and indiscriminately arrest immigrants,” he said.
A provision in the bill allows state attorneys general to sue the federal government if an undocumented immigrant is arrested, released and then commits a crime against the state or a state resident. Booker said the provision “allows one state to decide immigration policy for the rest of the country.”
» READ MORE: Two New Jersey Democrats running for governor skipped a controversial vote on immigration. This is where they stand.
U.S. Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, one of five Pennsylvania Democrats in the House of Representatives who opposed the bill, stressed that it strips away the right to a fair trial by applying to anyone charged or arrested with theft-related crimes. “Trump has promised these kinds of dangerous changes, and Republicans in Congress are desperately trying to please him, regardless of the consequences of the legislation becoming law,” she said.
The bill failed to pass the Senate last year, but several Democrats who opposed it changed their position and the chamber is now controlled by the GOP. The democratic shift on immigration restrictions reflects the shift in public opinion on immigration more broadly over the past year.
A Gallup poll showed this summer more adults – 55% – would like to reduce immigration to the US than 41% who favored a decline in 2023. For the first time since 2005, a majority of Americans said they wanted less immigration.
The Senate reconvenes next week, when Republicans will need seven Democrats to support passage of the legislation as written. Otherwise, it would proceed to amendments, in which case it would return to the House for final adoption.
