WASHINGTON — The Republican-controlled Senate is aiming to pass a bill to crack down on illegal immigration in the coming days, with the hope of sending it to incoming President Donald Trump next week as his first legislative victory.
But Senate debate on the bill has dragged on this week, with two main hurdles still on the road ahead to passage of the Laken Riley Act, which would require Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to detain people who are charged, arrested or convicted for committing acts of “burglary, theft, larceny, or shoplifting.”
The first obstacle is securing 60 votes in the Senate to break a filibuster and end the debate, which means winning at least seven Democratic votes — or more if they vote when there’s an empty seat in Florida or Ohio. That could depend on whether Republicans allow more amendments, which leaders are being selective about, as they target a vote on final passage by Monday.
“There are some Democrats who are trying to undermine the bill,” Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., told NBC News. “Republicans are not going to undermine or weaken this lifesaving bill.”
The second obstacle is the House will have to vote on the bill again after the Senate.
The Senate voted 70-25 to adopt an amendment by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, to add assault of a law enforcement officer to the list of offenses by an unauthorized immigrant that triggers mandatory detention. The GOP-led House passed the initial bill 264-159 last week, with the support of 48 Democrats.
Republicans also hope to vote on an amendment from Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, requiring ICE officials to detain undocumented migrants who are arrested or charged with causing death or bodily harm.
The new amendments would also raise the final price tag of the bill.
In an ICE assessment to Congress last year, officials predicted the Laken Riley Act — named after a Georgia nursing school student who was murdered last year by an undocumented immigrant —would cost $3.2 billion to enforce. But Democratic appropriators pushed back, and in conjunction with input from ICE officials, estimated a cost of $83 billion over just the first three years, according to a document obtained from a Democratic source.
“Beyond the exorbitant costs, [the Department of Homeland Security] would not be able to comply with the language as written. The personnel, detention space, and transportation requirements to execute the bill are not feasible to obtain in the near future,” the document states.
Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., who introduced the Senate bill, accused Democrats of “using a projection of 800,000 criminal illegal aliens who would be affected by this bill in year one” which they call an “old” projection based on a March 2024 briefing with ICE officials.
“We’re prepared to give ICE the resources it needs to properly enforce federal law and protect American families, both through the appropriations and reconciliation processes,” she said, referring to two potential paths to secure additional funding.
In a move fueled by the rightward shift in immigration politics, many Democrats in competitive House districts voted for the legislation and some senators in swing states, like Sens. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., and John Fetterman, D-Pa., have co-sponsored it.
But while many Senate Democrats voted to begin debate on the bill, some have said they won’t support final passage unless the Senate adopts some amendments to the bill, like Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis. It’s unclear whether it’ll achieve 60 votes in the end.
Even some supporters of the bill say it could be improved: Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., told NBC News it should be modified to avoid targeting migrants who are merely accused — rather than convicted — of crimes. She also called for a carve-out for “Dreamers,” or undocumented people brought to the country as children.
Democrats are pushing Republicans to grant votes on additional amendments, but it is far from certain that they’ll get any.
Pro-immigration activists have blasted the bill as a Trojan horse by conservatives to upend the system, strip away due process for migrants and empower hard-line state officials like Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to reshape federal immigration enforcement.
“It is difficult to overstate the extent to which Democratic leadership is flailing right now,” said Leah Greenberg, co-executive director of the progressive group Indivisible. “Republicans are going to do this over and over. They’re going to package something as a messaging bill, and inside it, they’re going to dismantle constitutional protections and empower extremism. Democrats need to stop scoring Trump’s political points for him.”
They point to a provision in the Laken Riley Act that would allow state attorneys general to sue the federal government for allegedly failing to enforce immigration law “if the State or its residents experience harm, including financial harm in excess of $100.”
An amendment proposed by Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., to strip out that language failed Wednesday as Republicans shot it down on a party-line vote of 46-49.
If Democrats don’t get any of their requested changes, they will be forced to decide whether to swallow the bill anyway — or filibuster it before final passage.
“Republicans seem to have decided that they aren’t interested in making the bill better,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
