Report: Laken Riley Act has Enough Senate Democrats to Start Debate
The procedural vote will happen on Friday.
Semafor’s Burgess Everett posted on X that two sources said the Senate has enough Democrats to start a debate on the Laken Riley Act.
New: Sen. Britt told Senate Republicans today she has the necessary eight Democratic votes to advance the Laken Riley Act over the first filibuster later this week, according to two sources
— Burgess Everett (@burgessev) January 8, 2025
Senate Republicans need at least eight Democrats to vote with “them in a procedural vote on Friday.”
The legislation, named after Augusta University nursing student Laken Riley, would mandate the government “detaining” illegal aliens “charged with theft or burglary.”
Athens-Clarke County Superior Court Judge H. Patrick Haggard found illegal alien Jose Antonio Ibarra, 26, guilty of murdering Riley.
According to Fox News, the NYPD arrested Ibarra “a year after he entered the U.S. in August 2023 and was ‘charged with acting in a manner to injure a child less than 17 and a motor vehicle license violation.'”
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) cosponsored the bill on Tuesday. He said:
Laken Riley’s story is a tragic reminder of what’s at stake when our systems fail to protect people. No family should have to endure the pain of losing a loved one to preventable violence. Immigration is what makes our country great. I support giving authorities the tools to prevent tragedies like this one while we work on comprehensive solutions to our broken system.
He explained on Fox News that if the bill did not get enough Democrats on board just to debate it, “that’s the reason why” the party lost in 2024.
The Republican-led House passed the Act on Tuesday with 48 Democrats voting yes.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Will say it’s my first agreement with my Senator Fetterman.
The fact they are even considering a filibuster of this bill shows how evil they are.
Let me provide one caveat: I’m assuming the bill is as represented and there’s not some carp loaded into the back end of this thing. I don’t want Republicans doing that stuff any more than I want Democrats doing it. Make it just about this one thing and get it done.
There’s a general rule that a law named after a person is always heavily flawed. Mainly because that’s the way it has invariably worked out so far. I’m hoping this one will be the exception, but I’m not putting any money on the table.
are these the same that voted against deporting illegals that are rapists and sex offenders?
Yes.
Attempting a filibuster on this is exactly why no one should trust the d/prog about immigration. Not legal or illegal, not visa policy or any other aspect of immigration. This legislation requires detention of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes. If we can’t get agreement that the actively criminal among illegal aliens should be detained and deported those on the other side ain’t acting in good faith. Eff them, no comprise is acceptable.
Laken Riley Act has enough votes to start debate.
What is there to debate?
“If we can’t get agreement that the actively criminal among illegal aliens should be detained and deported those on the other side ain’t acting in good faith.”
The Communists never acting good faith.
What is there to debate? Passage of the bill. To pass a bill you must first have a debate, and to start a debate you need to take a vote. The Dems don’t want the debate to happen, so they will try to filibuster it, but if 8 Dems vote to start the debate it will start. And next week Jim Justice will be in the senate, so only 7 Dems will be needed to actually pass it in the face of a filibuster.
My guess? All eight of the Democrats supporting this in the Senate are up for reelection in 2026.
As a dad with only one child (a daughter) my only unpunishable thought on evil coming for my girl is to train as her the most thorny and deadly rose on the bush.
I sense a trap. If the Senate votes on this before the 21st, can Biden veto it?
Yes. If the legislation passes both the House and Senate and is sent to the President for signature he can (and most probably will) veto it out of spite.
Sesame Street teaches that if a bill is vetoed, it can go back to Congress and be passed regardless. It must be some obsolete thing that happened before the Civil War or something, because I can’t remember the last time Congress even bothered to take one of those up again.
Overriding a veto requires a 2/3 majority of both houses. There would not be enough votes.
Yup, but it’s worthwhile to make the attempt, just to be able to tar the opposition. That sort of ignominy stays fresh for years. And who knows — if they know that’s going to be the result, it may be enough to scare a mess of yes votes out of them after all.
There have been many vetoes overridden since the Civil War. The last time was in 2021, in the waning days of the Trump administration.
But it takes 2/3 of each house.
So they need to time passage for after the 21st.
Schumer is very suspect. I think he may be running with a different team. One that protects sex criminals.
Leave a Comment