Children’s Defense Fund-Texas (CDF-Texas) urges all members of Congress to vote NO on HR 29, the Laken Riley Act. This is not a border security bill. HR 29 is a discriminatory, anti-immigrant bill that violates the U.S. Constitution by rolling back basic due process protections that protect those who are wrongfully arrested from losing their immigration status. Rather than preventing future tragedies, HR 29 will destabilize local communities and economies across the country while enriching private prison corporations that will profit from the indefinite detention of immigrants.
What the bill says:
- This bill requires the mandatory immigration arrest and detention—without access to bail—of any undocumented person convicted of, charged with, or merely arrested for any burglary, theft, larceny or shoplifting offense. There is no statute of limitations and no mechanism for the individual to contest their immigration detention in order to resolve the criminal charges against them (if charges are even brought).
- The bill also gives individual states standing to override the executive branch’s federal immigration policy by suing the federal government based on any allegation that the federal government has caused “harm” (including financial loss of any amount over $100) to the state or its residents by improperly implementing the detention and removal provisions under federal law, issuing immigrant visas, or granting temporary parole to an immigrant.
HR 29 manipulates the tragedy of Laken Riley’s death to criminalize and demonize immigrant communities. This is bad policy, based on harmful and misguided rhetoric. As the mayor of Athens-Clarke County said last year, the conversation about Laken Riley’s death should be focused on mourning the tragic loss endured by her family and loved ones because of the acts of one person, not blaming an entire group of people.
Contrary to harmful rhetoric, there is no correlation between immigrants and rising crime, as the data has clearly and repeatedly shown. A comprehensive Department of Justice study, using data from the Texas Department of Public Safety between 2012 and 2018, found that “undocumented immigrants are arrested at less than half the rate of native-born U.S. citizens for violent and drug crimes and a quarter the rate of native-born citizens for property crimes.” The same study revealed that, during this period, “undocumented immigrants had the lowest offending rates overall for both total felony crime … and violent felony crime … compared to other groups. U.S.-born citizens had the highest offending rates overall for most crime types, with documented immigrants generally falling between the other two groups.”
These findings highlight that immigrants are not driving crime rates in the United States. Policies and narratives suggesting otherwise are not only inaccurate but also perpetuate harmful stereotypes that damage immigrant communities and the nation as a whole.
HR 29’s provisions on standing would grant individual states unprecedented authority to override the executive branch’s federal immigration policy. This would allow state attorney generals to disrupt the immigration system and flood our nation’s courts with frivolous lawsuits. The doctrine of “standing” is critical to maintaining the proper balance of power in our democracy. Based on Article III of the Constitution, courts have consistently held that an entity or person must face possible, meaningful harm to establish standing to bring a lawsuit in federal court. HR 29 undermines this principle by granting states standing to sue even when they have no legitimate interest at stake in the outcome of the case.
This would open the floodgates to lawsuits from states against the federal government. Any discretionary decision to release individuals could be challenged, effectively granting state governments the legal authority to oppose federal immigration policies they disagree with. In recent years, the attorneys general of Texas and Louisiana have repeatedly asked federal courts to find they have standing to challenge federal immigration laws on the basis of openly discriminatory claims that their states are being harmed by public funding that allows immigrants to access the same education, health care, and criminal legal programs as other U.S. residents.
This provision would sow chaos by disrupting the establishment of a coherent federal immigration policy. It would force the Department of Homeland Security to cater to the demands of whichever litigious states manage to take their cases to court first. Such a system would undermine the rule of law, creating inconsistencies and inefficiencies. Immigration enforcement, already a complex and resource-intensive process, would become even more expensive and cumbersome, further destabilizing the system and its ability to function effectively.
HR 29 would escalate the mass incarceration of people of color, including children and youth, by enabling anti-immigrant law enforcement practices and profiling of individuals perceived to be undocumented, leading to arrests based on trumped-up charges. This discriminatory practice would disproportionately harm Black and Brown immigrant communities, exacerbating existing inequalities. The bill also mandates the prolonged, indefinite detention of immigrants without bond, even when charges are not filed. Such measures would impact hard-working immigrants, including DACA recipients, who have long contributed to their communities as teachers, entrepreneurs, homeowners, taxpayers, and essential workers across critical industries, threatening the very fabric of diverse and thriving communities.
HR 29 lacks essential protections for underserved populations, including minors and individuals struggling with mental health issues. It applies a one-size-fits-all approach, treating those convicted of felonies the same as individuals merely accused of minor offenses like theft or shoplifting. The bill also strips judges of the ability to consider individual circumstances, leading to harsh and unjust outcomes. For instance, a mother in poverty who shoplifts diapers out of desperation would face the same punitive measures as someone who commits burglary for profit. This indiscriminate treatment not only undermines fairness but also exacerbates the hardships faced by marginalized communities.
In Texas, we have already seen the ways that similar anti-immigrant policies such as Operation Lone Star and Senate Bill 4 are fueling mass incarceration, violating constitutional rights, and placing communities of color in harm’s way. Human Rights Watch describes Operation Lone Star as “a deadly Texas law enforcement scheme” that “promotes racial profiling, fuels the mass incarceration of people of color, and encourages white supremacist rhetoric that is harmful to all Texans.”
HR 29 would align seamlessly with existing anti-immigrant policies in states like Texas, intensifying the unjust incarceration of countless noncitizens. This approach blatantly ignores humanitarian, financial, and foreign policy repercussions. In communities where racial profiling is already a documented and significant issue, HR 29 would serve as a tool for targeting immigrants, perpetuating fear and mistrust. Entire communities could be driven into silence, too afraid to report crimes or collaborate with law enforcement. Such outcomes would not only harm immigrant families but also weaken public safety and community cohesion.
HR 29’s mandatory detention provisions will also put hundreds of thousands of children across the U.S. at risk of family separation. An estimated 5.1 million U.S. citizen children across the country live with an undocumented family member. Texas is home to more than one million of those children, and 12.5% of all U.S. citizen children in Texas live with at least one undocumented parent. If their primary caregiver is arrested, these children face immediate risks to their health and safety. Over the long term, detention or deportation of a parent negatively impacts children’s academic performance and future job prospects. Family separation also results in severe psychological harm to children that persist into adulthood and impact every aspect of their lives.
The American people did not vote for mass cruelty. Polling consistently shows that voters want Congress to come together to find real solutions, ones that balance sensible border security with pathways to citizenship for millions of immigrant families who are integral to our workforce and communities. HR 29, however, takes the opposite approach. It creates a framework for mass detention and deportation, which would not only devastate our communities and economy but also inflict lasting trauma on millions of American children. This bill undermines the values of justice and compassion that are at the heart of a thriving society.
We urge Members of Congress not to succumb to a political ploy that manipulates the tragic death of a young woman to demonize and criminalize an entire group of people. Immigration is not a threat to public safety. Every individual deserves due process in criminal proceedings, and all children deserve to grow up in safety, free from the fear of having their families torn apart.
We strongly recommend a NO vote on the Laken Riley Act.