WASHINGTON – The Laken Riley Act narrowly cleared the Senate filibuster in a 61-35 vote Friday morning. The bill would require the Department of Homeland Security to detain and deport immigrants living in the U.S. illegally who are charged with theft, burglary, larceny or shoplifting.
Friday’s action allows it to advance to a final vote Monday afternoon, in which it will only require a majority to pass.
Colorado lawmakers voted along party lines. Both Democratic Sens. Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper voted against the bill, and Republican Congressional District 3 Rep. Jeff Hurd joined other Colorado Republicans in voting for the bill, which passed the House last week.
After the House vote, Hurd shared a video statement on the social platform X, saying that he was “proud to have supported” the bill and calling it “a piece of legislation that will make Colorado communities safer.”
The Laken Riley Act – named for a Georgia college student killed in February by a Venezuelan immigrant who had been arrested and then paroled for shoplifting – also gives state attorneys general the ability to sue the federal government and require immigration officials to track down and detain immigrants who had previously been detained for such offenses.
The bill is part of the new Republican-controlled Congress’ effort to crack down on illegal immigration. Supporters argue it will save lives like Riley’s, while opponents worry about giving attorneys general more power in immigration divisions and a lack of due process for those detained.
The Senate amended the bill Wednesday to include mandatory detention of immigrants accused of assault on a law enforcement officer.
Democrats, including both Colorado senators, had proposed several amendments to the bill, but only one Democratic amendment received a vote. That amendment would have removed the provision allowing state attorneys general to sue the federal government, but it failed to pass the Senate Wednesday.
The bill heads for another amendment vote on Monday before the final Senate vote. The amended bill will go back to the House for approval once passed by the Senate.
Both senators shared disappointment that there weren’t more votes or debate on Democratic amendments, echoing Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s, D-N.Y., opening remarks on the Senate floor Friday.
Bennet said he was worried about “a lot of unintended consequences” that could come from the bill, especially related to underage immigrants without legal status. Hickenlooper shared this concern.
“So for me, the fact that this is opening all the doors to arrest and detain kids, there’s no age limit,” Hickenlooper told a reporter from Colorado Public Radio. “Kids that have been found guilty of nothing except being here, they’re going to be detained indefinitely. They have no rights whatsoever. It’s just not the way America has operated.”
Both senators cosponsored an amendment that would have exempted minors under 16 and immigrants eligible for DACA status from the bill. The pair also cosponsored an amendment that would have required immigrants without legal status to be convicted – rather than arrested or charged – of these crimes before being detained, among other provisions.
Bennet also worried about the consequences of allowing state attorneys general to sue the federal government, which would shift power from the federal government to the states.
“The other is a concern that we’re turning over the enforcement of the immigration policies and laws of the United States to state attorneys general instead of doing what the Founding Fathers wanted us to do, which is administer immigration from the federal government,” Bennet said. “Because every state and every city in America can’t police our immigration laws effectively.”
Others share this concern. The bill does not provide funding to expand immigration detention centers to handle any influx of detainees as a result of the act, and, according to an NPR report, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement estimates that it could cost nearly $27 billion to carry out in the first year.
Hickenlooper also questioned the broad effects of the state attorneys general provision.
“What does that look like? What are the consequences?” he asked. “You rush to action with a bill like this and then all of a sudden over the next years you deal with sometimes deadly consequences.”
Kathryn Squyres is an intern for The Durango Herald and The Journal in Cortez and a student at American University in Washington, D.C. She can be reached at ksquyres@durangoherald.com.