Laken Riley Act
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Create an account to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Progress
Where this bill stands in the legislative process.
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To President
- Became Law
Overview
The Laken Riley Act aims to increase the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) ability to detain non-U.S. nationals who have been arrested for theft-related crimes. It allows states to sue the federal government if DHS releases individuals suspected of such crimes, and it establishes a process for states to seek injunctive relief related to immigration enforcement decisions. The bill also includes provisions related to visa issuance and parole requirements, allowing states to sue over violations that cause financial harm.
Key provisions
- Requires DHS to detain non-U.S. nationals charged with burglary, theft, larceny, or shoplifting.
- Authorizes states to sue DHS for releasing individuals suspected of theft-related crimes.
- Establishes a process for states to sue the federal government over immigration enforcement decisions.
- Addresses visa issuance and parole requirements, allowing states to challenge violations.
- Defines ‘burglary,’ ‘theft,’ ‘larceny,’ and ‘shoplifting’ based on the jurisdiction where the crimes occurred.
- Grants attorneys general of states standing to sue DHS regarding immigration-related actions.
- Sets a financial threshold ($100) for states to demonstrate harm in lawsuits.
- Specifies that certain actions, such as state lawsuits, are exempt from a limitation on injunctive relief.
Who is affected
- U.S. Citizens
- Non-U.S. Nationals
Bill text
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.
Text extraction is in progress. View the official source.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
55 on record
Primary sponsor
Cosponsors
Arguments
Reasons offered for and against this legislation.
Arguments in favor
No arguments in favor have been submitted.
Submit yoursArguments opposed
No arguments opposed have been submitted.
Submit yours