Why Are Democrats Voting for a GOP Bill to Deport People Accused, Not Convicted, of Minor Crimes?
John Fetterman, Ruben Gallego, and other Senate Democrats are not telling the truth about the bill they support and how it will destroy innocent lives.
Democrats spent the 2024 campaign warning Americans about the dangers of a second Donald Trump presidency for immigrants, with references to "fascism" and "white supremacy." Vice President Kamala Harris attacked Trump for "fanning the flames of fear" around immigration, while House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries accused the Republican Party of bringing "xenophobic" legislation to the House floor.
Yet, just weeks after a humiliating defeat in both the presidential and congressional elections, Democrats have dropped their previous criticisms of the GOP on this issue and are now helping Republicans empower Trump's anti-immigrant regime.
The new legislation in question would enable Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency to summarily subject undocumented migrants arrested for minor offenses (and not necessarily found guilty!) to detention, and empower individual state attorneys general – such as radical anti-immigrant Ken Paxton of Texas – to hobble federal immigration policy and block visa programs.
After 48 House Democrats voted for the bill in the House, at least six Democratic senators have thrown their weight behind it outright – with scores more voting to advance the measure for debate.
Known as the Laken Riley Act, the eight-page bill is named for a 22-year-old college student killed by an undocumented immigrant last year. Jose Ibarra, the perpetrator, was previously cited for felony shoplifting. The Republican-led measure directs ICE to take custody of and detain undocumented people who are arrested for, convicted of, or admitted to burglary, theft, larceny, or shoplifting (once detained, they would be subject to deportation proceedings).
The language is broad. If a migrant is arrested for something they didn’t do, there is no due process afforded to them. They would then be subject to mandatory detention.
The language is also problematic and exploitable. As critics have pointed out, it could further empower abusive bosses or romantic partners to dangle the threat of detention towards their workers or partners – or seek retribution against them if they resist their abuse.
The bill would also authorize state attorneys general to bring forth lawsuits against federal immigration policies if they claim their states are harmed by them, by guaranteeing them legal standing. An attorney general could seek to block policies granting legal forms of residency or parole. They could target individual cases. Or, they could seek to issue wide visa bans to countries that do not accept the deportation of their own nationals. As Aaron Reichlin-Melnick of the American Immigration Council points out, this could impact millions of Indian and Chinese nationals, for example, if a state chose to pursue it.
ICE has also reportedly warned Congress that the bill would prompt mass detention and necessitate an expense to the tune of billions. Without offering details, the office of GOP Sen. Katie Britt, who is co-sponsoring the bill in the Senate, told Axios Congress would find the necessary funding via the “appropriations and reconciliation processes.”