The Laken Riley Act amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to require the mandatory detention of undocumented immigrants who have been convicted or simply charged with theft in the United States - even without a conviction. The Act:
- Defines "theft" to include burglary, larceny, and shoplifting as these offenses are termed under the jurisdiction where they occurred.
- And requires the Secretary to issue a detainer for any alien who is charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or admits to committing such an offense.
- Grants state attorneys general the right to sue the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General to enforce the Act's provisions and other grounds.
- Prohibits the Secretary of State from granting visas to citizens of countries that refuse to accept the return of their nationals who have been deported from the United States.
The Laken Riley Bill has been passed by Congress and is expected to be signed into law by President Trump in the coming days, allowing the administration to use it as a tool to attack employment-based visas.
The bill allows states to sue to cancel all visas from countries that do not take back their undocumented immigrants. India and China are two of those countries. India and China also have a high number of undocumented migrants that cross the border into Texas. Once the bill becomes law, states like Texas (with sympathetic attorney generals) may use this provision to cancel all H-1B visas from countries such as India. Texas may be able stop the H-1B visa processing for over 600,000 H-1B holders all over the U.S., which will likely create turmoil for many U.S. employers.
Note: there are press reports that the Indian government is in discussion with the U.S government to comply with the requirement to take back undocumented immigrants who were originally from India
The bill also grants broad authority to state attorneys general to bring lawsuits against the U.S. Department of Homeland and Security and the U.S. Department of Justice —to force them into compliance with immigration laws—under various circumstances, provided their state can show that federal enforcement failures are minimally damaging to it. Once again, one such scenario is triggered if the government tries to deport people to their country of origin, but that country refuses to accept them.
This provision will likely be challenged as unconstitutional, as it grants the state's power over immigration matters that has historically been the providence of the federal government. Ultimately, this issue would likely reach the United States Supreme Court, and it remains uncertain how the High Court will rule.
The Laken Riley Act offers one example of the "long game" that is being played by the Trump administration to shape immigration policy, as U.S. corporations that use employment-based visas and visa holders may have an unrealistic belief that they are immunized from the Trump Administration's attack upon undocumented workers. However, they may become aware over time that by turning on immigrants, new administration also undermines the country's technology sector, one of the things that actually makes America great.
