Congressional Record, Volume 170 Issue 41 (Thursday, March 7, 2024)

[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 41 (Thursday, March 7, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H1013-H1020]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

LAKEN RILEY ACT

Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House
Resolution 1052, I call up the bill (H.R. 7511) to require the
Secretary of Homeland Security to take into custody aliens who have
been charged in the United States with theft, and for other purposes,
and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1052, the bill
is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:

H.R. 7511

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Laken Riley Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS; SENSE OF CONGRESS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds that the Nation--
(1) mourns the devastating loss of Laken Riley and other
victims of the Biden administration's open borders policies;
(2) honors the life and memory of Laken Riley and other
victims of the Biden administration's open borders policies;
and
(3) denounces the open-borders policies of President Joe
Biden, ``Border Czar'' Vice President Kamala Harris,
Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, and other
Biden administration officials.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the Biden administration should not have released Laken
Riley's alleged murderer into the United States;
(2) the Biden administration should have arrested and
detained Laken Riley's alleged murderer after he was charged
with crimes in New York, New York, and Athens, Georgia;
(3) President Biden should publicly denounce his
administration's immigration policies that resulted in the
murder of Laken Riley; and
(4) President Biden should prevent another murder like that
of Laken Riley by ending the catch-and-release of illegal
aliens, increasing immigration enforcement, detaining and
removing criminal aliens, reinstating the Remain in Mexico
policy, ending his abuse of parole authority, and securing
the United States borders.

SEC. 3. DETENTION OF CERTAIN ALIENS WHO COMMIT THEFT.

Section 236(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1226(c)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``or'';
(B) in subparagraph (D), by striking the comma at the end
and inserting ``, or''; and
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following:
``(E)(i) is inadmissible under paragraph (6)(A), (6)(C), or
(7) of section 212(a), and
``(ii) is charged with, is arrested for, is convicted of,
admits having committed, or admits committing acts which
constitute the essential elements of any burglary, theft,
larceny, or shoplifting offense,'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (4); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
``(2) Definition.--For purposes of paragraph (1)(E), the
terms `burglary', `theft', `larceny', and `shoplifting' have
the meaning given such terms in the jurisdiction where the
acts occurred.
``(3) Detainer.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall
issue a detainer for an alien described in paragraph (1)(E)
and, if the alien is not otherwise detained by Federal,
State, or local officials, shall effectively and
expeditiously take custody of the alien.''.

SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF A STATE.

(a) Inspection of Applicants for Admission.--Section 235(b)
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1225(b)) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Enforcement by attorney general of a state.--The
attorney general of a State, or other authorized State
officer, alleging a violation of the detention and removal
requirements under paragraphs (1) or (2) that harms such
State or its residents shall have standing to bring an action
against the Secretary of Homeland Security on behalf of such
State or the residents of

[[Page H1014]]

such State in an appropriate district court of the United
States to obtain appropriate injunctive relief. The court
shall advance on the docket and expedite the disposition of a
civil action filed under this paragraph to the greatest
extent practicable. For purposes of this paragraph, a State
or its residents shall be considered to have been harmed if
the State or its residents experience harm, including
financial harm in excess of $100.''.
(b) Apprehension and Detention of Aliens.--Section 236 of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1226), as
amended by this Act, is further amended--
(1) in subsection (e)--
(A) by striking ``or release''; and
(B) by striking ``grant, revocation, or denial'' and insert
``revocation or denial''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Enforcement by Attorney General of a State.--The
attorney general of a State, or other authorized State
officer, alleging an action or decision by the Attorney
General or Secretary of Homeland Security under this section
to release any alien or grant bond or parole to any alien
that harms such State or its residents shall have standing to
bring an action against the Attorney General or Secretary of
Homeland Security on behalf of such State or the residents of
such State in an appropriate district court of the United
States to obtain appropriate injunctive relief. The court
shall advance on the docket and expedite the disposition of a
civil action filed under this subsection to the greatest
extent practicable. For purposes of this subsection, a State
or its residents shall be considered to have been harmed if
the State or its residents experience harm, including
financial harm in excess of $100.''.
(c) Penalties.--Section 243 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1253) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(e) Enforcement by Attorney General of a State.--The
attorney general of a State, or other authorized State
officer, alleging a violation of the requirement to
discontinue granting visas to citizens, subjects, nationals,
and residents as described in subsection (d) that harms such
State or its residents shall have standing to bring an action
against the Secretary of State on behalf of such State or the
residents of such State in an appropriate district court of
the United States to obtain appropriate injunctive relief.
The court shall advance on the docket and expedite the
disposition of a civil action filed under this subsection to
the greatest extent practicable. For purposes of this
subsection, a State or its residents shall be considered to
have been harmed if the State or its residents experience
harm, including financial harm in excess of $100.''.
(d) Certain Classes of Aliens.--Section 212(d)(5) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``Attorney General'' each place it appears
and inserting ``Secretary of Homeland Security''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) The attorney general of a State, or other authorized
State officer, alleging a violation of the limitation under
subparagraph (A) that parole solely be granted on a case-by-
case basis and solely for urgent humanitarian reasons or a
significant public benefit, that harms such State or its
residents shall have standing to bring an action against the
Secretary of Homeland Security on behalf of such State or the
residents of such State in an appropriate district court of
the United States to obtain appropriate injunctive relief.
The court shall advance on the docket and expedite the
disposition of a civil action filed under this subparagraph
to the greatest extent practicable. For purposes of this
subparagraph, a State or its residents shall be considered to
have been harmed if the State or its residents experience
harm, including financial harm in excess of $100.''.
(e) Detention.--Section 241(a)(2) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(a)(2)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``During the removal period,'' and
inserting the following:
``(A) In general.--During the removal period,''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) Enforcement by attorney general of a state.--The
attorney general of a State, or other authorized State
officer, alleging a violation of the detention requirement
under subparagraph (A) that harms such State or its residents
shall have standing to bring an action against the Secretary
of Homeland Security on behalf of such State or the residents
of such State in an appropriate district court of the United
States to obtain appropriate injunctive relief. The court
shall advance on the docket and expedite the disposition of a
civil action filed under this subparagraph to the greatest
extent practicable. For purposes of this subparagraph, a
State or its residents shall be considered to have been
harmed if the State or its residents experience harm,
including financial harm in excess of $100.''.
(f) Limit on Injunctive Relief.--Section 242(f) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1252(f)) is amended
by adding at the end following:
``(3) Certain actions.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to an
action brought pursuant to section 235(b)(3), subsections (e)
or (f) of section 236, or section 241(a)(2)(B).''.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour,
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member
of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees.
The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Bishop) and the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Nadler) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr.
Bishop).

General Leave

Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and
extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on H.R. 7511.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from North Carolina?
There was no objection.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, today, the House says the name ``Laken Riley'' through
H.R. 7511, the Laken Riley Act.
On this day, 2 weeks ago, the life of a 22-year-old nursing student,
Laken Riley, a beautiful and vibrant young woman, came to an abrupt and
shocking end, a totally unnecessary end, when she was abducted from her
morning run around Lake Herrick Trail on the campus of the University
of Georgia in Athens and brutally killed, beaten to death and to a
state of disfigurement by a criminal alien whom Joe Biden and Alejandro
Mayorkas were under legal obligation to detain.
Laken's failure to return home alarmed her roommate, who called
police. Police found her discarded body in the woods off the running
trail, her skull crushed.
Last Friday, Laken's parents laid their daughter to rest, their lives
destroyed by the senseless and depraved actions of a criminal who
should not have been here and the callous indifference of the President
and the Secretary of Homeland Security.
A Venezuelan, Jose Ibarra illegally entered into our country across
the southwest border in 2022. The Biden administration released him,
just like millions of others, paroled him into the country to roam
wherever he pleased, rather than detaining him as the law required.
Jose Ibarra roamed to New York City. There, in August, NYPD arrested
him for driving a scooter without a license with a child on board
unprotected by a helmet, and an independent obligation arose for
Homeland Security to detain Mr. Ibarra; namely, that he had committed
an offense involving moral turpitude by endangering that child.
However, NYPD released him and Homeland Security did nothing.
From New York City, Jose Ibarra roamed to join his brother Diego,
another criminal illegal alien, in Athens, Georgia. Athens police
arrested Diego in September for driving while intoxicated and without a
license, also an offense involving moral turpitude which required
detention by Homeland Security. However, Homeland Security again did
nothing, and Diego, too, was promptly released.
In October, Jose and Diego joined forces to rip off the local
Walmart, and it must have been quite something for them to be arrested
for shoplifting in this day and age, but arrested they were. Then
another basis in law arose for mandatory detention, specifically two or
more criminal offenses, by each of them, involving separate criminal
acts. Again, Homeland Security utterly disregarded Congress' statutory
command and did nothing. The Ibarra brothers were set free upon the
community again.
In December, a final chance came to prevent Laken Riley's fate.
Athens police arrested Diego again for failure to appear for a
fingerprintable offense. Why didn't they arrest Jose? Who knows. Maybe
they figured, what is the point? Homeland Security will just continue
looking the other way. Even though Diego was also now an absconder, he
was released again. The big bureaucratic Department of Homeland
Security did nothing.
Secretary Mayorkas was asked whether Jose Ibarra should have been
deported before he beat Laken Riley to death. He answered blandly that
his agency works closely with law enforcement ``to ensure individuals
who pose a threat to public safety are made the highest priority for
detention and removal,'' which reminds me of the more than 30 times
Secretary Mayorkas testified to Congress under oath that the border was
secure.

[[Page H1015]]

What the Secretary omitted to explain was the law he laid down in
September 2021, the memo to the Department of Homeland Security
employees, where he instructed that the grounds specified by Congress
for detention would never be the basis standing alone for any detention
by Homeland Security; the law according to Alejandro Mayorkas.
Today, the Laken Riley Act presents two simple and straightforward
amendments to law to break through the Biden administration's brazen,
defiant, and reckless disregard for Laken Riley and all the other
vulnerable Americans out there victimized already or soon to be
victimized.

{time} 1230

First, it specifies theft offenses as a ground mandating the
Secretary of Homeland Security to take into custody criminal illegal
aliens like Jose Ibarra and to issue a detainer request to local law
enforcement.
How hard is that, Mr. Speaker? Shouldn't illegal aliens be required
to be detained at the border in the first place? Shouldn't those who go
on to engage in thievery in our country be detained and removed? Who
could disagree with that?
If H.R. 7511 only added another detention mandate to the slew that
Secretary Mayorkas is brazenly defying even today, then it would be an
act of futility. It would be more statutory commands to an
administration that is lawless, and it would do nothing to honor the
life and memory of Laken Riley.
Therefore, the other essential element of this bill is to confer
standing upon State attorneys general to bring civil actions against
open-borders executive branch officials who refuse to enforce the
Nation's immigration laws.
This provision comes from H.R. 7322, the SUE for Immigration
Enforcement Act, introduced by Chip Roy and me. It would empower States
to hold Homeland Security accountable in Federal courts for flouting
mandatory detention requirements, the limits of parole authority, and
visa sanctions against countries that refuse to cooperate with
repatriation of illegals removed from our country.
This responds to the Supreme Court's ruling of 2023 in United States
v. Texas that States lack standing in such cases, and it follows the
roadmap set forth in the Court's opinion in that case inviting Congress
to cure the standing defect by specifically authorizing such suits in
statute.
The provision confers standing upon a narrowly defined set of
plaintiffs, the States, and it authorizes the judiciary to grant
redress. As such, this legislation would ensure that harmful abuses of
our immigration laws--in fact, those policies set forth by the Biden
administration that are in direct conflict and contradiction with the
plain meaning of our laws--will not go unchallenged.
H.R. 7511 also honors Laken Riley's life and those who mourn her loss
as well as all the other victims of the Biden border crisis.
No law passed by this body can bring back Laken or take away the pain
suffered by her family and countless other victims of criminal alien
crime. The Laken Riley Act, however, will ensure that illegal aliens
who commit theft offenses, as Laken's alleged murderer did, cannot be
shielded by the Biden administration's continued reckless and callous
indifference.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want to start by expressing my deepest condolences to
Laken Riley's family. The pain of losing a child is something no parent
should have to go through. The alleged perpetrator should be prosecuted
to the fullest extent of the law.
By all accounts, Laken was a kind and gentle soul, beloved by
everyone around her. May her memory be a blessing.
Unfortunately, instead of coming together to express our sorrow for
Laken's tragic loss, the majority appears to be exploiting her death
for yet another partisan political stunt.
Rather than approaching this tragic event in a thoughtful manner,
Republicans appear to have just thrown together language from existing
unrelated bills that target and scapegoat immigrants to score cheap
political points in an election year, while doing nothing to address
the situation at the border.
This approach is fundamentally unserious. As if to emphasize the
point, the author of this legislation spent the weekend promoting anti-
Semitic memes on Twitter.
At base, this bill is a rinse and repeat of the majority's unserious
attempt to keep immigration in the news: pick a crime; paste it into a
template bill with sweeping, unrealistic immigration consequences; and
then require detention and deportation of certain immigrants merely
accused of committing such a crime--no due process required--all so
that you can demonize immigrants and sound tough without actually
making this country safer.
The legislation before us today would subject to mandatory detention
any undocumented immigrants merely arrested or charged with committing
an act of theft, larceny, or shoplifting, along with those who are
convicted or who admit to committing such acts.
Let's think about that. Someone who is arrested and who was never
even charged with a crime is now going to be subject to mandatory
immigration detention?
The case of Laken Riley is a tragedy, but as is often said, hard
cases make bad law.
Under this bill, committing a misdemeanor shoplifting, or even
committing no crime at all, can result in a DACA or TPS recipient,
someone who may have been in this country for decades, being subject to
mandatory detention.
Sadly, there are countless real-life examples of people getting
arrested because of mistaken identity through erroneous witness
identification, biographical similarities to perpetrators, and errors
caused by faulty facial recognition technology.
In a markup we had in the Judiciary Committee last month, Mr. Massie
discussed how mistaken identification can deprive someone of their
constitutional rights. He noted very real concerns about racial
disparities in the development of artificial intelligence and facial
recognition tools. These tools have led to numerous erroneous arrests,
mostly of people of color.
For example, just over a year ago, a Detroit woman was arrested for
robbery and carjacking after she was improperly identified as the
perpetrator by automatic facial recognition search. She was 8 months
pregnant when she was arrested. After being held by the police for 11
hours, she was released on a $100,000 bond. It took a month and two
hearings for the case against her to be dismissed.

Under this bill, however, if this woman had been on DACA or TPS
status, ICE would have been required to detain her upon release, and
her U.S. citizen son would have been born in immigration detention even
though she had committed no crime.
Mandatory detention of innocent people is not a reasonable or
sensible policy choice. This is not where we should be focusing our
limited enforcement resources.
It is important to remember that this bill would subject more people
to mandatory detention at a time when Republicans refuse to give the
Department of Homeland Security the resources it needs to carry out its
policies.
The Biden administration is currently detaining 39,000 people a day.
That is 5,000 more people than Congress has even provided funding for
it to detain.
Congress has never appropriated, and no administration has ever
requested, sufficient resources to detain all noncitizens who fall
under the ``mandatory detention'' categories. Even former President
Trump never tried to detain all migrants subject to mandatory
detention.
House Republicans know this, but instead of facing that reality and
providing the resources necessary to address weaknesses in the
immigration system, they would prefer to demagogue the issue, and they
bring us measures like this.
If that wasn't bad enough, this bill also purports to give State
attorneys general standing to sue in court for perceived violations of
certain sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act, hoping to
convince the judicial branch to impose draconian immigration policy
preferences that MAGA Republicans have failed to get through

[[Page H1016]]

the political branches of the Federal Government.
This bill simply declares that States have standing to sue so long as
the State or its residents suffer almost any degree of harm, no matter
how trivial, appearing only to exclude financial harms that are less
than $100.
We should note that this provision is almost certainly
unconstitutional. Just declaring that there is standing does not make
it so.
Just last year, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of States'
standing to sue the Federal Government over immigration enforcement
matters, which this bill appears to be a half-baked attempt to
circumvent. In an 8-1 decision, the Court held that Texas and Louisiana
lacked Article III standing to bring suit against the Federal
Government over its alleged violation of some of the very same
immigration statutes that this bill would purport to grant standing to
the States to sue over.
In rejecting the States' standing argument, the Court noted, among
other things, that lawsuits alleging insufficient arrests or
prosecution run against the executive branch's Article II authority to
enforce the law, which includes the discretion to determine enforcement
priorities in the face of lack of resources and shifting public safety
and public welfare needs.
This bill also goes directly against the Supreme Court's settled
precedent in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, which explicitly states that a
statutory right to sue does not constitute an injury for purposes of
standing.
Be that as it may, settled precedent, much like responsible
governance, doesn't seem to matter much to the majority. Time and
again, Republicans have refused to engage in bipartisan immigration
reform. At the behest of Donald Trump, Republicans dismissed out of
hand a bipartisan Senate border bill that Senate Minority Leader
McConnell called the strongest border bill in 30 years.
In October, the Biden administration sent Congress a supplemental
funding request, which included an additional $14 billion for border
security. House Republicans refused to schedule a vote on this funding
request, which would provide the Biden administration the resources it
needs to secure the border and would provide additional support for
communities receiving migrants.
Both these bills would have allowed the Biden administration to hire
thousands more asylum officers and asylum and immigration judges, so
asylum hearings happen in weeks, not years. This would help put an end
to what my Republican colleagues refer to as catch and release.
That is the procedure in immigration law that has been used by every
administration for decades. What they mean by that is you catch
someone, but because of lack of resources, his court date is 3 years
from then, so you have to release him pending the court date because he
has a credible claim to asylum. However, with the appropriation that
the Biden administration had requested, it could be done in weeks, not
years, and we wouldn't have the problem of the so-called catch and
release.
All they can point to is H.R. 2, which last week had a grand total of
32 ``yes'' votes in the Senate when it was brought up for a vote.
Instead of rushing yet another partisan stunt to the floor, the
majority should work with Democrats to pass bipartisan solutions to
address the situation at the border. That would be a far better way to
truly honor the lives of those we have tragically lost.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen).
Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from North Carolina for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, just 2 weeks ago, at the hands of a violent illegal
alien, we lost yet another American life, a beloved daughter, student,
and Georgian. This has been heartbreaking for the family, our
communities, and this Nation. That is why I stand before you today, Mr.
Speaker, and rise in strong support of H.R. 7511, the Laken Riley Act.
Laken was an outstanding student at Augusta University's nursing
school in Athens and was well on her way to a successful career in
helping others and saving countless lives, all to be cut brutally short
by a vicious criminal.
This should have never happened and cannot happen again in this
Nation. In fact, this could have been prevented had the Senate passed
H.R. 2 and secured our border.

It is the responsibility of Congress and this administration to make
sure that every American can live in this country safely and that we
are a law-abiding nation.
Not only is the suspect in Laken Riley's tragic death here illegally,
but he also has a criminal record that includes shoplifting in Athens-
Clarke County. Allowing this criminal to freely roam our communities
was absolutely unacceptable.
H.R. 7511 would ensure illegal immigrants who commit theft are
detained by ICE rather than released back into our communities. The
bill would also allow States to sue the Federal Government for failing
to enforce our border laws.
I am sick of President Biden and liberal officials across the country
not enforcing current law. It is beyond me how anyone can support the
sanctuary and catch and release policies that have attracted illegal
aliens to those communities, just like the one responsible for taking
Laken Riley's life.
In fact, the President has statutory authority to secure our border.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge a ``yes'' vote on this important
legislation to protect our Nation.
Robin, our family, and I continue to join all of our fellow Georgians
and this Nation in praying for Laken's family and loved ones. She will
not be forgotten.

{time} 1245

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ivey), a member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Mr. IVEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 7511, the House
Republicans' unconstitutional attempt to violate the separation of
powers doctrine.
While I take issue with many aspects of this bill, I am particularly
concerned that this bill is a blatant effort to overturn the Supreme
Court's 8-1 ruling in United States v. Texas and wrongly blame the
Biden administration for three decades of border enforcement
challenges.
In the Texas case, States sued the Department of Homeland Security
about border enforcement. Justice Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee, writing
for the 8-1 majority, stated that Texas did not have standing in its
lawsuit against the Federal Government. He wrote:

The threshold question is whether the States have standing
under Article III to maintain this suit. The answer is no.

This bill does not change the Supreme Court's clear ruling.
Determining whether States can bring suit in this type of immigration
case is a power that is vested in the Federal courts, not Congress.
Justice Kavanaugh also made clear that the discretion to arrest and
detain aliens is a power granted to the executive branch and that:

Executive branch does not possess the resources necessary
to arrest or remove all of the noncitizens covered by the
Federal immigration laws.

That reality is not an anomaly. It is a constant.
Kavanaugh noted, in addition, that: ``For the last 27 years . . . all
five Presidential administrations have determined that resource
constraints necessitated prioritization in making immigration
arrests.''
That means DHS cannot detain everybody, so the executive branch, not
the States, have to make choices. Unfortunately, this bill would not
give DHS the resources to change that.
Instead, House Republicans rely on political stunts, like impeaching
Secretary Mayorkas, even though that won't fix the problem at the
border. The bipartisan Senate bill that House Republicans refuse to
even debate actually would help to address these problems, but the
majority won't bring that bill to the floor for a vote. If the
Republicans did, it would pass. That is because we all know we need
more border agents and more judges to eliminate the backlog of
immigration cases.
However, the Republicans are not proposing more resources or any
legislation that might truly make a difference.

[[Page H1017]]

This bill was not a serious attempt to address the actual border
security needs and, as such, I would urge my colleagues to oppose it.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock), the chairman of the
Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and
Enforcement.
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, Laken Riley's death was foreordained the
day that this administration took office and reversed the successful
Trump policies that had finally secured our borders.
Since that day, just 3 years ago, more than 6 million illegal aliens
have been allowed to enter our country, a population the size of the
State of Missouri, our eighteenth largest State.
Very little is done to vet these millions of illegal migrants. We
don't know how many terrorists or violent criminals are among them.
Additionally, worse, this administration seems not to care.
However, we do know that the number of suspected terrorists that we
are apprehending has skyrocketed and that violent international crime
cartels and violent foreign gangs are now operating freely in our
communities, often protected from deportation and detention by the
Democrats' sanctuary laws.
One of these criminals is now accused of the brutal murder of Laken
Riley. We do not know how many such monsters this President has allowed
into our country, but we are slowly, painfully, and tragically finding
out victim by victim.
In this case, the suspect was paroled into this country through a
shocking abuse of power by this President. He was repeatedly arrested
for theft and other crimes in sanctuary jurisdictions and was each time
released back onto our streets.
The bill before us would require this administration to detain
illegal aliens who commit theft, burglary, larceny, or shoplifting,
something it simply refuses to do. It would also allow States to bring
civil action against Federal officials who refuse to enforce these
laws.
Today, the name on the bill is Laken Riley. Tomorrow, it will be
another victim of these policies, another son or daughter or loved one,
and it won't stop until this administration is stopped. That can only
be done by the American people.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Duarte). Members are reminded to refrain
from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, the previous speaker said that illegal
aliens who committed crimes should be detained, and, indeed, they
should. However, this bill says that illegal aliens who somebody thinks
may have committed a crime should be detained mandatorily. That is un-
American.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Tiffany).
Mr. TIFFANY. Mr. Speaker, I stand in support of the Laken Riley Act.
First, I want to express sincere condolences from everyone in the
Seventh Congressional District to Laken Riley's family.
Then-candidate Biden promised in 2020 that we would have open
borders, and we have seen the devastating consequences, and it is
happening all over the country.
In January, a father of three daughters was killed by an illegal
alien in my congressional district in northern Wisconsin. Once again,
this illegal alien should have been deported by ICE agents when he was
first convicted of drunk driving in 2023. Once again, the Biden
administration chose not to deport him.

Sadly, Mr. Speaker, this is hardly a surprise. In fact, in 2020, Joe
Biden himself declared, I don't count drunk driving, when asked what
crimes should merit the removal of illegal aliens. He is not alone.
As we all know, just a few short weeks ago, 150 Democrats in this
Chamber voted against legislation to deport criminal aliens convicted
of drunk driving. Mr. Speaker, the sad truth is that both Laken Riley
and Steven Nasholm's deaths were preventable.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, our hearts do go out to the family of Laken
Riley.
Now, we also must acknowledge that we can no longer take the feigned,
empty words of sympathy from those across the aisle who refuse to do
something meaningful to stop the onslaught that is happening in America
today.
Let's think about this. You need to acknowledge you haven't done
anything. You sent to us a foreign aid bill that you have claimed is a
border security bill. It is no such thing.
However, let's face this fact, as well. Let's face the fact that the
law requires detention already. The detention provisions of title 8 are
civil in nature and not criminal in nature, and that is why there is
already authority and mandates to hold people in custody when they
haven't been convicted of various acts, such as drug distribution,
prostitution, and other vices. This bill simply adds another criminal
offense to a civil construct.
Let's admit that you don't want to stop that. Let's admit that you
don't really want to secure the border. If you wanted to secure the
border and if this administration wanted to secure the border, there is
authority under title 8 right now to enact border closure procedures.
This administration has allowed people to come in running rampant.
This administration should apologize to the family of the 11-year-old
girl who was raped last week by a Guatemalan illegal alien who should
never have been released from custody.
This happens over and over again. It is time now to stand up and say
you support this bill, and you are going to begin to take action to
bring the border under control.
If you want to talk about parole, we can go into a lengthy discussion
about parole, but I am not going into a lengthy discussion.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Van Drew).
Mr. VAN DREW. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.
Laken Riley is dead because of Joe Biden's policies. There are no
words that I can say that will bring her back to life. There are no
words that will bring back State Trooper Christopher Gadd. There are no
words that will bring back 16-year-old Lizbeth Medina. There are no
words that will bring back all those who have been brutally beaten,
murdered, and damaged by illegals who were let out on parole.
However, for God's sake, pass the Laken Riley Act.
Also, President Biden, stop paroling illegals over and over again.
Stop killing our Americans. Stop hurting our Americans.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks
to the Chair.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Clyde).
Mr. CLYDE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 7511, the Laken
Riley Act, and our hearts do go out to her grieving family today.
This bill is in remembrance of Laken Riley, the 22-year-old nursing
student who was tragically murdered in my home community of Athens,
Georgia, by an illegal alien who should never have even been in the
United States. After illegally entering the country, Laken's murderer
was arrested by the NYPD in September of 2023 for acting in a manner to
injure a minor and for committing a motor vehicle license violation.
Also, according to an Athens-Clarke County police report, this
illegal alien went on to shoplift in Georgia the following month.
Clearly, this illegal alien had a pattern of criminal history, one that
started when he accepted Joe Biden's invitation to illegally enter our
country and do so under an abuse of the parole system.

He should never have been allowed to reside in the United States
illegally, and ICE should have immediately issued a detainer after he
committed these crimes because, ultimately, if ICE had issued a
detainer, this illegal alien would never have been in the United States
to commit the horrific murder of Laken Riley.

[[Page H1018]]

We must enact changes now to protect communities across the country
from facing additional avoidable tragedies. H.R. 7511 provides a
commonsense solution to do just that. This legislation requires ICE to
issue detainers and take custody of illegal aliens who commit crimes
like theft, burglary, and larceny.
Additionally, the local jurisdiction, the Clarke County Sheriff's
Office, would also have to recognize and act upon the ICE detainer.
When you have a sanctuary city like the Athens-Clarke County Unified
Government ignoring these detainers, it makes them a magnet for
criminal illegal aliens.
Therefore, I call right now on Athens-Clarke County to publicly
reject their sanctuary city policy. If they did, it would be a strong
step in the right direction toward preventing our citizens from
becoming future victims of violent crimes committed by illegal aliens.
Additionally, the Laken Riley Act contains within it Representative
Dan Bishop's own legislation that just passed out of the Judiciary
Committee. It is called the Standing Up to the Executive branch for
Immigration Enforcement Act. Hence, my friend, I want to recognize your
part in making this legislation happen.
These important provisions that Representative Bishop authored give
State attorneys general standing to bring suit against DHS Secretary
Mayorkas, Secretary of State Blinken, and Attorney General Garland for
violating certain immigration laws that harm the State or its
respective citizens. Representative Bishop's legislation also allows
for appropriate injunctive relief and expedites the disposition of such
civil actions.
This important legislation is critical. As a cosponsor, I urge my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the Laken Riley Act.
After all, one of the most formidable ways that Congress can deliver
justice to the Laken Riley family is by passing this legislation.

{time} 1300

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Molinaro).
Mr. MOLINARO. Mr. Speaker, Laken Riley's future was taken away from
her and she from her family because an illegal immigrant in the State
of New York was arrested and released, my home State.
My colleague across the aisle knows this full well. Because of
policies put in place by this administration, embraced by governors
like Kathy Hochul in States like New York, we have surrendered our
southern border and made our communities less safe.
It is important to move on this piece of legislation, and I encourage
my colleagues to support the Laken Riley Act, but I also ask my
colleagues, especially those from New York, to take serious the
challenge that has been made worse and communities less safe because of
cashless bail, catch and release, and sanctuary city policies in the
State of New York.
I ask them to join me in calling on Governor Kathy Hochul--instead of
talking about it--to take action to rescind cashless bail, reform catch
and release, and end sanctuary city policies to make safe the people
and communities in the State of New York.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), the majority leader.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from North Carolina for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, it is so important that we have this debate on the floor
and that we pass the Laken Riley Act.
It would be more significant if later tonight in this very Chamber
Joe Biden joined us and said that he was going to finally take action,
using the same pen that on day one when he became President he used to
undo all of those actions that were securing our border if he would say
he is going to reverse those actions.
He can work to restore the remain in Mexico protocol, getting us back
to a functioning asylum process. He could take direct action with his
own pen, no act of Congress, to end catch and release, so that when
people come here by the millions as they have, they are not just
allowed to go into the interior of our country where we don't even know
where they are going.
Governors can't tell you how many people have come into their States
illegally, where they are showing up. You see it in cities where they
are showing up and they are shutting down schools and gymnasiums to
house people.
This is out of control and Joe Biden created the mess. He could solve
it, but short of Joe Biden solving it, the House has taken multiple
actions to address it.
This Republican House came together last year to pass H.R. 2, a bill
designed to actually secure America's border. We took all of those
necessary actions, whether the President wants to or not, doing the
things that it takes, working with our Border Patrol agents to secure
America's border so that we don't have what we have seen, at least 8
million people that have come across illegally.
When you look at some of the devastating consequences, Laken Riley is
just one example. I pray for her and I pray for her family. No family
should have to go through what Laken Riley's family is still grieving
with today, but, unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, this is not even an
isolated incident.
It is happening over and over again in communities all across America
ever since Joe Biden opened our southern border, allowing millions of
people to come in. You are seeing countries emptying out prisons to
send people here. People on the terrorist watch list, over 140 that we
know of on the terrorist watch list, that have been detained. How many
that we don't know of that haven't been caught that are here in America
planning to do us harm because Joe Biden opened the southern border?
There is serious negative consequences to those actions that Joe
Biden took. When you think about Kenner, Louisiana, a community in my
backyard, part of which I represent in my district, just days ago a 14-
year-old girl was raped by someone here illegally.
You saw just recently where a 2-year-old was murdered by someone here
illegally. How many more communities are going to have to suffer? How
many more families are going to have to be victims before Joe Biden
admits this problem and then works with us to solve it?
They tried passing a bill in the Senate that actually makes it worse,
that codifies things like catch and release, and that gives over a
billion dollars of your taxpayer money to fund lawyers for people here
illegally.
Yes, that was in the Senate bill that even the Senate didn't pass
after all of that hoopla about a bipartisan coalescence. They didn't
even pass that bill once they read it.
The House did pass a bill to solve this problem. Today, we are coming
together to pass another bill here with the Laken Riley Act to solve
this problem, but the worst part of it is, this problem should have
never happened if Joe Biden didn't take the steps he took with the pen
to open the southern border. He could close it himself. He chooses not
to.
We came together and said, then we will close it, Mr. President, and
issued veto threats on those bills. He wants an open border, but does
he want the consequences to?
Will he look those families in the eye and tell them enough is enough
and apologize to them? He could do that tonight from that podium. I
sure hope he does, but in the meantime what he really needs to do is
work with us to end this madness, to secure America's border, and get
back to a functioning, legal system of immigration in America like
every other country has so that we don't see this endless flow that is
devastating communities all across America.
Mr. Speaker, let's pass the Laken Riley Act and, hopefully, there
will be no more examples like Laken Riley in the future.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Scalise and the other Republicans are not serious
about solving the problem we all talk about. Mr. Scalise says the
solution is H.R. 2, a bill so serious it received 32 votes in the
United States Senate, a body with 49 Republican Senators.

[[Page H1019]]

If the Republicans were sincere and serious about solving this
problem, they would vote for the $14 billion that the President has
requested to hire more Border Patrol people and more judges so that
asylum decisions can be made in weeks and not years, and he wouldn't
have the problem of catch and release.
If Republicans were serious, they wouldn't have tanked the Senate
bill developed in negotiations with principally Senator Lankford, who
is considered the second-most conservative Senator in the Senate, and
that bill was going to be agreed to until President Trump decided--
former President Trump and hopefully never again President Trump--
decided that he would rather have an issue for the campaign than solve
the problem, so he told the Republicans to tank the bill that they had
just written.
Let's talk about hypocrisy. That is what we are hearing in this
Chamber. That is what we hear all the time from a Republican Party that
loves the rhetoric, that loves to use the victimhood of people like
Laken Riley for political purposes, but this is a Republican Party that
does not want to solve this problem, will not take any serious step to
solve this problem, and is trying to create a fraud on the American
people by pretending that it cares about this problem.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins), who represents Athens, Georgia.
Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Bishop for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have introduced the Laken Riley Act, and I
urge you to join me in voting to pass this bill today.
As Joe Biden comes to the Capitol tonight to defend his atrocious
record, the House is voting to rebuke him for the open border policies
that led directly to Laken Riley's murder.
Enough is enough. The President and the DHS Secretary Alejandro
Mayorkas have released millions of illegal aliens into this country and
they refuse to secure our border and keep Americans safe.
Unfortunately, the man who murdered Laken was among those millions.
Despite committing several crimes in multiple jurisdictions, he was
allowed to roam free in America before brutally murdering Ms. Riley on
the campus of the University of Georgia on February 22.
Mr. Speaker, Laken was only 22 years old, a nursing student. She had
her whole life and a bright future ahead of her. This young woman was
an exemplary daughter, sister, and friend. She was cherished by so many
people for her loving nature and her servant's heart. She would be with
us today if elected leaders who took an oath to preserve our
Constitution and faithfully execute our laws had kept their word, but
they didn't.
While we can't bring Laken back, we must now turn our focus to doing
everything we can to prevent this from happening to another American.
The Laken Riley Act is a key piece in our fight to restore the rule
of law and get criminal illegal aliens off our street. This legislation
will give Immigration and Customs Enforcement more tools. It will add
theft to the list of crimes for which the agency must detain and deport
an illegal alien.
This is crucial. Many people who commit petty crimes go on to commit
worse crimes. Laken's murderer, Jose Antonio Ibarra, is a prime example
of this. Ibarra was cited for shoplifting in Athens, Georgia, just
prior to murdering Laken, but under current law, ICE would not have
been required to pick up Ibarra, even if local law enforcement had
reported him.
Let's change that.
Let's also give States the legal recourse when the Federal Government
fails to enforce immigration law. The Laken Riley Act does that. States
will be able to sue the Federal Government for injunctive relief when
illegals released into this country harm our people.
Lastly, the bill condemns the President's border policies and calls
on him to end catch and release, reinstate remain in Mexico, and secure
the borders of the United States.
Mr. Speaker, today we act on behalf of those who are no longer with
us because of Joe Biden's policies. I thank my colleagues for rallying
alongside me to highlight Laken Riley's life these past 2 weeks. Let's
continue to pray for her family and friends as they grieve her loss and
resolve to continue fighting for the American people against the
lawlessness created by this administration.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on the
Laken Riley Act, and when it passes, I also urge my colleagues in the
Senate to take this up immediately.
Let's ensure justice for Laken Riley.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close as
well, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I want to close where I began, by expressing my deepest
condolences to the family of Laken Riley. I only wish that we were
debating a bill worthy of her name. Instead, we have the latest
Republican press release, a bill that serves as an excuse to target and
demonize immigrants while making our country no safer. I hope that my
Republican colleagues will change course and choose to work with
Democrats and with the administration in a constructive manner that
improves our immigration system and makes our border more secure.
Until then, I must urge Members to oppose this bill, and I yield back
the balance of my time.

{time} 1315

Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance
of my time to close.
H.R. 7511 is but the latest effort by Republicans to do something
about the harm that confronts our Nation from an uncontrolled border by
the determined action of President Biden and Democrats.
H.R. 2 is an extensive bill with many provisions and extensive
reform. Democrats have ignored it. This bill is exceedingly simple and
straightforward. Democrats attack it. The excuses for doing nothing
never end.
The only answers offered by Democrats are to spend more money
processing more aliens faster into the country, making the problem
worse, and yet they always deflect blame to someone else for the
calamitous results of their policies.
This bill is very straightforward. The objection that a thief should
not be deported until after a conviction leaves Americans to be
victimized for all the time that would have gone by until a conviction.
It is not required under the law.
The distinction between the point the gentleman from New York made
about Mr. Massie's bill concerning the use of facial recognition
technology, that is about American citizens. The people involved here
have no right to be in this country. They are not supposed to be here.
They also object that the standing change, that the conferral of
standing on State attorneys general is unconstitutional, will not work,
but it is Justice Kavanaugh in the opinion of the Court in United
States v. Texas who said:

For example, Congress might specifically authorize suits
against the executive branch by a defined set of plaintiffs
who have suffered concrete harms by executive under-
enforcement and specifically authorize the judiciary to enter
appropriate orders requiring additional arrests or
prosecutions by the executive branch.

This bill takes that invitation from the Court to act. It is far past
the time for President Biden to act. He will not act. Let's act in this
United States Congress.
We have the chance to give States the ability to fight back. We have
the chance to recognize Laken Riley's story as a tragedy. There need
not be other tragedies.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Laken
Riley Act, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 7511, the
Laken Riley Act.
For the third time in three months, House Republicans are bringing
their repackaged partisan talking points to the floor and reviling
America's immigrant communities. H.R. 7511 is another bill that
undermines constitutional due process and politicizes a tragedy. The
murder of Laken Riley is tragic, and it should not be exploited by
Republicans looking to use it to pass their harmful legislation.

[[Page H1020]]

This bill would compel the Department of Homeland Security to take
into custody all non-citizens who have been arrested for theft. No
conviction is required, and no additional resources are provided to the
Department to carry out this mandate. As I've said before, in America,
you are innocent until proven guilty. This has been the law of the land
for hundreds of years. This bill is another poorly written slippery
slope that undermines the rights of all people legally present in the
United States.
Laken Riley's murder is a tragedy. She was a 22-year-old college
student who should still be alive today. Republicans are using this
horrible event as a political ploy, when they should be coming to the
table to find meaningful, bipartisan solutions to fix our broken
immigration system. Until then, their dangerous and partisan ploys ring
hollow.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1052, the previous question is ordered
on the bill.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas
and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

____________________