The Laken-Reilly Act is causing confusion in the Senate Democratic Conference. That's because senators believe their party failed on immigration and border security in 2024, but aren't satisfied with the swift passage of what they see as terrible policy. Democratic critics of the bill believe the rush to pass it is a political overreaction by Democratic lawmakers desperate to protect themselves on these issues.
Some Democratic senators feel that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D.N.Y.) is a politically vulnerable lawmaker without firm assurances that Democrats will have more opportunities to amend the bill. They are complaining that they have given the green light to vote to move forward with the bill.
Those Democrats likened the bill's handling of the bill to a chaotic retreat and warned it was causing deep frustration in a caucus still reeling from losing its majority in November.
“I'm very frustrated that the bill was not submitted to committee on something this important,” said one Democratic senator, who requested anonymity to discuss the heated debate that rocked the caucus.
“There is great concern because we are talking about mandatory prison terms based on charges that have not even been prosecuted, let alone convicted. This also applies to children,” the senator said. “This is a sweeping attack on core principles and there is not even an element of judicial review.”
The senator said Senate Democratic leadership did not pressure members to block the motion to advance the bill unless Republicans promised further votes on amendments to change the bill on the Senate floor. expressed dissatisfaction.
The lawmaker added, “I am extremely dissatisfied.'' “They raised the white flag from the beginning and said it was for too many people.” [in the caucus] Immigration is so harmful that we are moving forward with this bill without fully understanding its gravity and what it means in terms of indefinite detention based on allegations, violations of norms without judicial review. You have to overcome the problem. ”
Mr. Schumer downplayed the conflicts within his caucus, describing last Tuesday's lengthy lunch debate as a discussion of “all the important issues.”
But the Democratic Party, which represents a battleground state and faces a re-election race in 2026, is facing a re-election bid in 2026 after President Trump and the Republican Party bashed the party all year over the murder of 22-year-old nursing student Laken Riley. They were eager to vote to advance the bill. By a Venezuelan immigrant who entered the country without legal status and was previously arrested in New York and Georgia.
On Friday, 10 Democratic senators, including Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (Dannessey), voted to finalize the bill. Voted to proceed to a yes/no vote. There could be competitive racing next year.
The bill passed the Senate on Monday night.
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), who denounced the bill as bad policy, said the lack of an opportunity to amend the bill on the floor, with the exception of three amendments, means the full Senate cannot meaningfully address immigration policy. He said it reflected a widespread failure to discuss it. .
“I think this bill reflects that the Senate has broken down in some respects in the fact that we can't vote on amendments that would have improved the law. That's a real problem,” he said. Ta.
Bennett said he initially voted to move forward with the bill, “so we could have a discussion and make amendments. I think it's better to leave the decision on whether or not to introduce the bill.” I feel that very strongly.” [to] imprison [individuals] Report non-violent offenders to law enforcement. ”
He cited language in the bill that would require mandatory detention of immigrants without legal status who have been accused but not convicted of theft.
On January 13, 82 senators, including 24 from the Democratic caucus, voted in favor of passing the bill.
Bennett warned that the bill would require Immigration and Customs Enforcement to spend billions of dollars to incarcerate nonviolent offenders rather than violent ones. He also argued that state attorneys general will be in charge of immigration policy, which he said is the responsibility of the federal government.
Bennett, a member of the Senate's “Gang of Eight” that put together a comprehensive immigration reform bill that passed the Senate with 68 votes in 2013, conceded what Democrats called a “strong position” on the issue. he lamented.
“We once had a strong position defined by the work we did on the Gang of Eight bill, which was a comprehensive approach. It set out a comprehensive set of principles, including border security. It was a reflection,” he said.
“For years, we have not effectively communicated to the American people that we believe our border security and immigration system will help our economy,” he said. “I think it's important for us to be part of these discussions.” [on the Laken Riley Act] We have more clearly expressed our collective stand. ”
Bennett said Democrats' strategy to protect themselves from border-related attacks during the campaign by negotiating a border security deal with Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) was ineffective. Ta.
“I don't think the content was convincing to voters,” he said.
Even though the National Border Security Council, the Wall Street Journal, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce supported the bill, it received only four Republican votes to pass it on the Senate floor.
During former President Biden's four-year term in office, President Trump and the Republican Party continued to attack Democratic candidates over the massive influx of immigrants, totaling about 10 million people.
“Donald Trump has used our party as a punching bag when it comes to immigration and the border, and he didn't need to do that,” Bennett said.
Other Democrats are furious at the speedy passage of the Laken-Reilly Act, which is likely to pass the House and reach President Trump's desk.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) joined fellow Democrats in venting his frustration at not getting a chance to vote on further amendments.
“This is bad policy,” he said of the bill that passed the Senate on Monday. “We had amendments that were broadly supported by a majority of the caucus that would amend the bill.”
He said that would change the criteria for detention and deportation from arrest to conviction. [would have] Arrest was deemed sufficient if someone had a history of failing to appear in immigration court. ”
“I'm not happy about that,” Kane said.
“What's infuriating is that so many people are signaling, 'I'm going to vote yes with or without the amendment,' and that Republicans are rallying enough Democrats to vote yes.” If you go there, it will be recorded, [for a bill] Despite that, do they really have a robust amendment process or are they trying to amend the bill?'' he said.
“I hope my colleagues don't pre-emptively say, 'I'm voting yes anyway, so we don't have to consider the amendment at all.'” I think that was a strategic mistake. ,” Cain added. “With leadership, we might have been able to give everyone a little bit of a cabin story in the past.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders, R-Vt., who caucuses with Democrats, said he has concerns “about the bill, the process, and the product.”
“There are so many flaws in this bill,” he said. “The concern is what kind of precedent this sets from a criminal justice perspective and how much we believe in due process.”
Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vermont) said he is concerned about how the bill will be handled.
“We should take advantage of the committee process where we have the opportunity to deliberate and debate,” he said.
“My hope is that deportation will be based on conviction and not on indictment,” he added.
