Democrats line up against the Laken Riley Act, citing concerns over the erosion of due process rights and potential for judicial abuses.

At a Glance

• Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-NM) and other Democrats have voiced opposition to the Laken Riley Act, arguing it undermines due process protections
• The law, signed by President Trump in January 2024, mandates detention of illegal immigrants arrested or charged with violent crimes
• Critics including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez warn the act could lead to increased racial profiling and deportations without court hearings
• Republicans defend the legislation as necessary for border security and public safety
• Some Democrats who initially supported the bill have expressed regret over their votes

Democrats Stand Firm on Due Process Concerns

Democratic lawmakers have solidified their opposition to the Laken Riley Act, with Rep. Gabe Vasquez of New Mexico becoming a vocal critic of the legislation. Vasquez has been forthright about his vote against the bill, emphasizing constitutional protections as the foundation for his decision. The act, named after a nursing student murdered by an illegal immigrant, was the first bill signed into law by President Trump after his return to office earlier this year.

“I did. I voted against [the bill],” Rep. Gabe Vasquez stated, “Because due process is a fundamental part of who we are as Americans.”

The Laken Riley Act requires the Department of Homeland Security to detain undocumented migrants who have been arrested or charged with violent crimes. Since the law’s implementation, DHS has reported a significant increase in monthly arrests. The legislation also expands mandatory detention rules to include theft-related crimes and grants state attorneys general the authority to sue the federal government over immigration enforcement practices.

Growing Criticism from Progressive Democrats

While the bill received some bipartisan support, prominent progressive voices in the Democratic Party have raised serious concerns about its implications. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been particularly outspoken, warning that the law represents a fundamental threat to civil liberties. Her criticisms focus on provisions that could lead to detention and deportation without proper judicial review.

Rep. Eric Swalwell echoed these sentiments, expressing concern that the legislation could lead to racial targeting, stating bluntly that “people are going to be targeted because they’re brown.” Senator Cory Booker took a historical perspective, suggesting that lawmakers who supported the bill might regret their decision in the future, particularly regarding the potential indefinite detention of Dreamers and minor offenders.

Democrats Speak Out Against Laken Riley Act, Citing ‘Due Process’ https://t.co/4ukTMrzlcD

— One America News (@OANN) April 28, 2025

Republican Pushback and Political Fallout

Republicans have defended the Laken Riley Act as a necessary measure to address border security issues. Texas Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales pointed to what he characterized as “inaction under President Biden” on immigration enforcement. The National Republican Congressional Committee has targeted Democrats who opposed the bill, including Rep. Vasquez, accusing them of prioritizing the interests of illegal immigrants over American citizens.

The political repercussions continue to unfold as some Democrats express buyer’s remorse over their support for the legislation. Representative Jahana Hayes of Connecticut has publicly expressed regret about her initial vote for the bill, citing growing concerns about its implications for immigrant communities. This shift highlights the internal debate within the Democratic Party about balancing public safety concerns with constitutional protections.

Constitutional Questions Remain

The central debate around the Laken Riley Act continues to revolve around the tension between immigration enforcement and constitutional rights. Democrats maintain that expedited deportations without court hearings undermine the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Civil rights groups have raised concerns that the expanded detention provisions could lead to overcrowded facilities and family separations.

While the law’s supporters point to public safety benefits, critics argue that the legislation’s approach may actually make communities less safe by discouraging immigrant cooperation with law enforcement. As implementation of the Laken Riley Act continues, legal challenges are expected to further test its constitutionality and practical implications for America’s immigration system and judicial protections.