Senate Democrats Change Course on an Immigration Bill

What a difference 10 months—and an election cycle—can make.

By a whopping 84-9 margin, the Republican-controlled Senate on Thursday voted to advance the Laken Riley Act, an immigration enforcement bill named after a college student killed last year by a man who had crossed the southern border illegally. The bill will still need to undergo proposed amendments and proceed to a final vote, but the swell of support from the minority party to move it forward represents an about-face from Senate Democrats.

The support for the first bill of the new Congress also raises the question of why the Senate could not have debated the bill during the last session when Democrats were in control. The GOP passed it in the House last March with 37 Democrats voting in favor, but it languished in the Senate and never received a vote. After House Republicans introduced it again this year, it passed with 48 Democratic votes, including six from lawmakers who had voted against the legislation last year.

At least one of the converts was open about the political realities shaping his vote this year. “Few congressional districts saw a greater swing toward Donald Trump than mine, a more than 20 point swing, largely because of the issue of immigration,” Rep. Ritchie Torres of New York told The Dispatch. “And so, I’m voting in a manner that reflects the views of my voters. I think if you are undocumented and have committed no crimes, you should be protected from deportation. I could easily defend that, but once you commit a crime, it becomes indefensible.”

The Venezuelan immigrant convicted of murdering Riley had been charged with shoplifting—but was released because the charge was a misdemeanor—prior to killing her, and the bill would mandate the federal detention of undocumented immigrants who are arrested for, charged with, or convicted of larceny, burglary, theft, or shoplifting. It would also give states standing to sue the federal government for alleged harms due to a failure to enforce immigration restrictions.

In the aftermath of Riley’s February murder, Republicans quickly made the crime a focal point of their attacks on President Joe Biden related to border security. Most notably, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia wore a T-shirt and buttons imprinted with “Say her name” to the 2024 State of the Union address, challenging Biden to comment on the murder during the speech.

Democrats are attempting to figure out how to best respond to an election in which Trump and Republicans won a decisive victory in large part due to their effective campaign strategy focused on record illegal border crossings under the Biden administration. Some inside the Democratic Party are calling for a reorientation of messaging on illegal immigration, and the strong Democratic support shown in Thursday’s vote could be a sign that those in the Senate are taking a similar view to Torres’.

But if that’s indeed the case, many Democrats are not willing to be open about it. A few senators struggled to explain why then-Majority Leader Chuck Schumer did not move the bill forward for debate in the previous Congress. Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan—who is up for reelection in 2026 in a state Trump won last year—told The Dispatch simply, “I don’t know,” when asked why there was no action on the legislation in the previous session.

Sen. Jacky Rosen, who won reelection in Nevada in 2024 despite Trump winning the state by 3 points, deferred to Schumer. “You’ll have to ask the Democratic leader that,” she said. “That’s his job to set the agenda when we were in the majority, so that’s a Schumer question.”

Sen. Richard Blumenthal said Schumer’s decision may have been a function of the chamber’s bandwidth. “We had a lot of measures that were competing for time toward the end of the session,” the Connecticut Democrat said, “and I think that he wanted this bill to be a really good bill, if it was going to become law.”

Asked whether he thought Thursday’s vote was a sign that Democrats were shifting to the right on immigration, Blumenthal pointed to the need for broad changes to the immigration system, something neither party has been willing to tackle. “We need to consider solutions on border security, on visa shortages, on a path to citizenship for the Dreamers, on a variety of issues where there is a need for comprehensive—and I underscore comprehensive—immigration reform,” he said. “And I hope that we’ll move forward on comprehensive immigration reform during this session because the system right now is broken.”

Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania was more blunt, ascribing the shift by Democrats to “a blinding flash of common sense.” 

In a Thursday speech on the Senate floor announcing that he would vote to advance the bill, Schumer did not say why the Senate was just now taking action on it but called for discussion to improve it. “I expect that this bill will have enough votes from both parties to proceed. If we get on the bill, Democrats want to have a robust debate where we can offer amendments and improve this bill,” he said.

Those amendments could include tightening the requirements that trigger federal detention, but a number of Democrats have said they support the bill even in its current form. Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan voted for the bill when she was in the House last year, and Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona, another state Trump won, told reporters he would support the bill even if the current text is its final form. Fetterman and Sen. Ruben Gallego of Arizona have cosponsored it.

The days to follow will show if Republicans can pick off the seven Democrats they need to get the bill to a vote on passage, but the journey of the Laken Riley Act thus far shows how the minority party is absorbing one lesson of the 2024 election.