Laken Riley: what is missing for the law that affects migrants in the United States to be enacted | M.A.G.

The Laken Riley Act, recently approved by the United States Senate, is a legislative project that aims to strengthen immigration control measures in the country. Its name pays tribute to a Georgia nursing student who was murdered last year by an undocumented immigrant. The measure, pushed primarily by Republicans and with significant support from Democrats, has been promoted as a solution to security concerns at the southern border.

The Senate passed the Laken Riley Act on Monday, January 20 by a vote of 64 to 35, with 12 Democratic senators joining Republicans in passing it. After the modification of certain aspects in the Upper House, the project was sent back to the House of Representatives, controlled mostly by Republicans, for a new voting process. This approval is expected to be formalized soon, which would put the bill on President Donald Trump’s desk for his signature and eventual enactment.

The legislative proposal requires Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to detain undocumented immigrants who are arrested, charged or convicted of crimes such as robbery, theft or shoplifting. The measure aims to ensure that individuals who commit these acts are detained and confronted with immigration authorities, without waiting for a full trial or a final sentence.

In addition, the bill was modified in the Senate to include new provisions that expand the crimes that require arrest. For example, an amendment introduced by Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) extends the list to those accused of assaulting a law enforcement officer. Another, promoted by Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA), expands the law to include those who cause death or bodily harm during the commission of a crime.

One of the most controversial features of the Laken Riley Act is its focus on pretrial detention of immigrants without a formal conviction. Critics of the legislation point out that this measure could undermine due process of law by allowing the detention of people only on accusation, not necessarily a judicial conviction. This could open the door to the violation of fundamental rights of immigrants, especially those who have not yet been found guilty by a court.

The law also gives state attorneys general the ability to sue the federal government if they believe immigration laws are not being adequately enforced. This provision has raised concerns, as it could result in a fragmented law enforcement system, where each state has a different interpretation of immigration policies, which could generate more uncertainty and arbitrariness.

Although the bill has the support of several Democrats, it has also been the subject of criticism within its own party. Many Democrats oppose provisions that allow state prosecutors to intervene in immigration law enforcement, as this could result in a harsher and more unequal approach to the treatment of immigrants in different states. These opponents also fear that the law could have negative effects on “Dreamers,” young people who came to the country without documents as children. Although Senator John Fetterman (D-PA), one of the bill’s sponsors, acknowledged that the legislation would not protect Dreamers from mandatory detention if they are involved in the aforementioned crimes, he stated that protecting this group is one of its main objectives.

The amendments that passed the Senate before the final vote are a key point in the evolution of the Laken Riley Act. Republican lawmakers have argued that the addition of these more serious crimes justifies the need for mandatory detention for immigrants accused of such crimes. Supporters of the bill say these measures are necessary to protect public safety and ensure that those who commit violent or disruptive acts do not remain in communities without facing legal consequences.

However, critics point out that this approach could increase the vulnerability of certain immigrant groups and lead to harsher practices, such as detaining people for minor crimes without due process. Additionally, delegating power to state attorneys general could result in an unequal law enforcement system, with some areas of the country adopting stricter policies than others.

President Donald Trump has been one of the biggest supporters of this law and has praised the bipartisan support it has received. During his inaugural address, Trump referenced the Laken Riley Act, suggesting that its enactment would be an important step in creating a safer country. Trump has expressed his desire to sign the law within the next week, suggesting that the legislative process is moving quickly toward its conclusion.

Although the Laken Riley Act appears to have a clear path to passage, its implementation could be a challenge. Assigning responsibilities to state attorneys general to take legal action against the federal government could lead to conflicts in law enforcement, especially if states take disparate approaches. Furthermore, the lack of protection for Dreamers could generate a climate of uncertainty among many young immigrants who fear being affected by the new measures.

In conclusion, the Laken Riley Act continues to be a topic of debate in Congress, with important implications for both immigrants and security policies in the United States. Despite disagreements between Democrats and Republicans, the bill is one step away from becoming law, marking a significant change in the way immigration will be handled in the country.