A controversial new bill, the Laken Riley Act, is on the verge of reaching the President’s desk, marking a significant milestone in immigration legislation. While it has garnered substantial support from Michigan’s congressional delegation, it has also drawn criticism for its potential impact on civil liberties and immigrant communities.
Named in memory of a University of Georgia student, Laken Riley, who was tragically murdered by an undocumented immigrant in 2022, the bill has sparked a fierce debate. The man accused of her murder had previously been charged with shoplifting, highlighting the bill’s focus on individuals accused of certain crimes.
In the U.S. House, the bill passed with a vote of 263-156, with bipartisan support that included 46 Democrats such as Michigan’s Kristen McDonald Rivet (MI 8) and Hillary Scholten (MI 3). The Senate also approved the bill with a vote of 64-35, including support from both Michigan senators.
The proposed legislation mandates the Department of Homeland Security to detain individuals without legal status who have been arrested for crimes such as burglary, theft, larceny, and shoplifting. It also extends to offenses involving assault on law enforcement officers and acts causing death or bodily harm.
These provisions have raised alarms among civil rights organizations, who argue that the bill could lead to individuals being detained and deported based on old charges without a trial or conviction. The bill also allows states to sue the federal government over immigration enforcement decisions.
The Laken Riley Act was first introduced last March, shortly after Riley’s death, but it failed to pass the Senate at the time. Now, it is closer to becoming law, reigniting debates over its implications.
Hillary Scholten, a Democrat from Grand Rapids, supported the bill, citing the tragic story of Ruby Garcia, a local woman killed by her undocumented boyfriend. Scholten stated, “Just last year, our community was devastated by the tragic death of Ruby Garcia, a young woman who lost her life to domestic violence at the hands of someone who had illegally entered our country.”
Similarly, U.S. Senator Elissa Slotkin, also from Michigan, backed the bill despite acknowledging it doesn’t address the core issues of the U.S. immigration system. Slotkin expressed, “But no matter what, this bill certainly doesn’t address the root causes of our broken immigration system, which we need to do to ever truly deal with immigration issues writ large in this country.”
On the opposing side, Representative Rashida Tlaib (MI 12) expressed her concerns, warning that the bill could lead to increased profiling and militarization of immigrant neighborhoods. Tlaib remarked, “It’s going to fuel hate for their communities. It’s profiling our immigrant neighbors as somehow violent when we know we’ve all been living next to each other, within community together and feeling safe.”
Ruby Robinson, from the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, criticized the bill for undermining the principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ He argued, “In the United States, people arrested or charged of a crime or an offense are innocent until proven guilty, and this law turns that on its head.”
Concerns also extend to the bill’s financial feasibility. ICE has warned Congress that implementing the bill would be “impossible to execute with existing resources,” estimating a $26 billion cost in its first year.
However, Michigan Republican Congressman Tom Barrett remains optimistic, viewing the bill as a step towards enhancing national security and expecting funding issues to be resolved during the budget process.
It’s important to note that undocumented immigrants are not eligible for most federal public benefits, a point that some proponents use to argue for the bill’s necessity.
—
Read More Michigan News
