The Senate advances a migrant detention bill that could be Trump's first law to sign

WASHINGTON — The Senate is heading toward a final vote on legislation that would give states the power to challenge federal immigration policies and require federal authorities to detain migrants accused of theft and violent crimes, setting a new tone on immigration as Donald Trump enters the White House.

Newly in the majority, Senate Republicans have made the so-called Laken Riley Act — named after a Georgia student who was killed last year by a Venezuelan man — a top priority, potentially making it the first bill Trump signs as president.

On Friday, it cleared a key procedural hurdle 61-35, with 10 Democrats voting with Republicans to advance it to a final vote. The Senate is set to vote on final passage Monday after Trump's inauguration, but the House will also need to take up changes made to the bill.

Democrats, who last year allowed similar legislation to languish, initially supported opening debate on the bill, signaling a new willingness to consider crackdowns on illegal immigration following their election losses. However, most voted against advancing the bill to a final vote after they were unable to make significant changes to the legislation.

''The American people are rightly concerned about the illegal immigration crisis in this country, and they sent a clear message in November that they want to see it addressed,'' said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, who described the bill as ''the first of many'' on the topic.

In the early days of the new Congress, Republicans have dared Democrats to join them in efforts to restrict illegal immigration and deport migrants who are tied to crimes. In several cases, they have. Most Senate Democrats voted to advance the Laken Riley Act last week as they bartered for changes to the bill.

In the House, all Republicans, as well as 48 Democrats, voted to pass a similar version of the bill this month. And this week, 61 Democrats also voted for a separate bill to require deportation and block entry into the U.S. for foreign nationals who are convicted of physical or sexual abuse.

The votes have given Republicans some early wins as they enjoy a trifecta of power across the House, Senate and White House, though the bills have mostly retread on policy where federal authorities already have discretion to act.

Once Trump enters office and attempts to set up large-scale deportation operations, congressional Republicans will face intense pressure to pay for his priorities while also balancing their pledges to tame budget deficits and concerns about the economic, as well as humanitarian, impacts of mass deportations.

The Laken Riley Act does not have any new funding for immigration officials, but Democratic staff on the Senate Appropriations Committee estimate the bill would cost $83 billion over the next three years, according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press.

Republicans pushed back on that figure. At the same time, they are debating how to pass a major funding package through a process known as reconciliation that would allow the Trump administration to spend up to $100 billion on border and immigration enforcement.

Democrats, meanwhile, are searching for a path forward on their approach to immigration. The party is divided between those who now prioritize restrictions on illegal immigration and those who argue the party should also champion help for migrants who are already here or who are seeking relief from violence or persecution in their home countries.

''We Democrats want to see our broken immigration system fixed,'' said Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who supported negotiations on the bill but voted against its advance Friday.

He pointed to Democrats working with Republicans on a larger bill last year that would have clamped down on the asylum process. That legislation was rejected by Republicans after Trump came out in opposition to it, but Schumer said he would still ''stand ready'' to work with the GOP on border security and immigration.

''I think we have to prove that we're the only party serious about border security,'' said Sen. Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat.

He criticized the Laken Riley Act because it would require immigration authorities to give priority to detaining migrants accused or convicted of crimes like shoplifting, but potentially force authorities to release others convicted of more serious crimes. Murphy said it would just ''make the system more convoluted and more chaotic.''

The Senate will vote Monday on expanding the bill to also target migrants who assault a police officer or are accused of crimes that kill or seriously injure someone.

The legislation, as well as Riley's name, became a rallying cry for Republicans last year as they spotlighted President Joe Biden's handling of the border. Riley, a Georgia nursing student, was killed in February, and Jose Ibarra, a Venezuelan man who entered the country illegally and was allowed to stay to pursue his immigration case, was convicted of her murder.

Trump in the campaign repeatedly raised the issue of crimes committed by migrants, but there is no evidence that immigrants are more prone to violent crime. Several studies have found immigrants commit lower rates of crime than those born in the U.S. Groups that advocate for restrictive immigration policies dispute or dismiss those findings.

Ultimately, immigration experts said the most lasting effects of the legislation could be the provision that gives legal standing to state attorneys general to sue the federal government for harm caused by federal immigration policies.

That gives states new power in setting immigration policy when they have already been trying to push back against presidential decisions under both the Trump and Biden administrations. Democrats unsuccessfully pushed to have that provision stripped from the bill, saying it could open the door to major changes in federal policy.

‘’We have a really overwhelmed and stretched immigration system as it is and additional litigation just adds chaos,’’ said Kathleen Bush-Joseph, a lawyer and policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute.