They Should Vote No on the Laken Riley Act, S.5

Call your senator if you can:

Given the timetable, a call is the best way to advocate for justice, particularly if you reside in Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Maine (King), Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York (Schumer), Pennsylvania (Fetterman), or Virginia. (See more details below on these.) 

Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121

Script: "Hello, I am a constituent, and I urge the Senator to vote NO on the Laken Riley Act."

If you can not call, take this action, click to send a message

Ask your senators to “vote no on S.5, the Laken Riley Act.” In so doing, we join many other faith actors in similar calls to reject a cruel and cynically opportunistic proposal and instead support measures grounded in our collective concern, compassion, and solidarity for immigrant communities–they are us, and we are them.  We are together in our communities, schools, businesses, and households. These are our friends, neighbors, spouses, parents.

Please know, if S.5 passes, it would:  

• Reorganize the relationships of authority and oversight for immigration policy by allowing individual states to sue the federal government, thereby dictating immigration policy for the nation. For example, a state could sue to cease visa issuance to entire countries that a particular state’s political cadre dislikes or resents. This could flood the court system with litigation from states. 
• Present constitutional concerns. The bill provides automatic standing to states who file suit on the matters articulated in the bill. This seems unwise; it gives a fast lane to court, even if suits appear politically motivated. 
• Grant activist state attorneys general the power to dictate immigration policy at the federal and international levels. This bill authorizes states to seek federal court orders obligating the Executive Branch to detain and deport specific people or overturn individual humanitarian parole decisions. It is a bad idea, and poor approach.
• Require mandatory detention of certain noncitizens if they are arrested—even if they are never charged with a crime. The crimes covered include burglary, theft, larceny, and shoplifting-related offenses. Therefore, legal analysts project that the bill may interfere with criminal prosecutions, as individuals may be unable to attend criminal court hearings. Those individuals covered by the bill include any undocumented person or DACA recipients, including the Dreamers.
• Add to our already Byzantine immigration system. Our immigration laws currently mandate the detention of people who have committed serious crimes. This bill would expand that to include crimes that are not precisely serious. Further, detaining individuals who are unlikely to pose a significant risk to public safety is inhumane. We feel it is unnecessary.
• Raise the cost of our immigration system. Some analysts project that the unnecessary detentions will be costly. American taxpayers should not have to pay for these detentions.

Please call or email your senators and urge them not to pass this bill.  

The provisions in S.5 threaten to reorganize our immigration legal system, giving too much power to local political actors. This is a bad precedent. Also, mandating mass detention and deportations will not keep our communities safer, preventing another Laken Riley tragedy.

Community advocates worry S.5 will further criminalize migrant populations, extending the weaponization of the carceral system, leading to many more people being detained without access to bond. It is projected to have a disproportionate impact on Black and brown communities. See statements by Detention Watch Network and United We Dream.

Legal analysts are concerned that the bill’s core features violate constitutional tenets and worry about local and international consequences. See a letter by the American Immigration Lawyers Association and analysis by the National Immigration Law Center.