LWVUS Urges Congress to Oppose "Laken Riley Act" Mandating Detention

LWVUS joined a letter urging US Congress to oppose the Laken Riley Act, which would mandate the detention of undocumented people arrested for or charged with certain offenses including theft or violent crimes. This bill undermines due process.

January 21, 2025 

Oppose S. 5, the Laken Riley Act 

Dear Member of Congress: 

On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 240 national organizations to promote and protect the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States, and the 93 undersigned national organizations, we urge you to oppose S. 5, the Laken Riley Act. The senselessness of the murder of Laken Riley does not justify making unprecedented changes to immigration detention laws that – like all mandatory incarceration provisions – will only result in more discrimination while doing little to increase public safety. 

As we reflect on the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Congress’s consideration of S. 5, as amended in the Senate, stands in stark contrast to Dr. King’s dream of justice, equality, and liberation for all people, including immigrants, who seek freedom from oppression. Dr. King’s teachings remind us “that we are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny” and that “anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider.” His words are a charge to Members of Congress to act with moral clarity in moments of consequence such as these and to base your vote in people over power and policy over politics. 

S. 5 would require the mandatory detention – without any possibility of bond – of undocumented persons who are merely arrested for or charged with certain offenses, including misdemeanor shoplifting. It does not require conviction. There is no statute of limitations, and the bill does not specify any process by which a person might contest either their immigration detention or the underlying criminal charges (if charges are even pursued). Mandatory immigration detention on the basis of a mere arrest is unprecedented, and it would invite abuses that almost certainly would disproportionately impact people of color.  

We are also concerned with language in the bill that would give states standing to sue the federal government over any allegation that the federal government is improperly implementing immigration laws, such as detention and removal provisions, visa provisions, or its discretionary parole authority. This language would open the floodgates to litigation, and it would enable individual states to shape federal immigration policies.

We urge you to vote against S. 5. The Leadership Conference intends to include your position on S. 5 in our voting record for the 119th Congress. If you have any questions, please contact Senior Counsel Rob Randhava at [email protected]. 

Sincerely, 

See Attached Letter for Signatories