New Bill Proposes Changes in Federal Enforcement for Undocumented Individuals

People sitting on benches inside a fenced facility.

Rep. Troy Downing’s “Safeguarding American Property Act” expands the Laken Riley Act to target undocumented migrants accused of property crimes, leaving Democrats divided as Republicans push through an aggressive new immigration agenda.

Quick Takes

The Safeguarding American Property Act would expand federal detention requirements for undocumented individuals to include arson, vandalism, and trespassing.
The bill builds upon the Laken Riley Act, which has already passed both chambers with bipartisan support and awaits President Trump’s signature.
The legislation particularly aims to help rural communities near the southern border that have limited law enforcement resources.
Senate Republicans successfully advanced the Laken Riley Act with support from 12 Democrats, signaling a shift in Democratic positioning on immigration policy.
Critics argue implementation could cost billions and overwhelm an already strained immigration system.

Expanding Enforcement Against Property Crimes

Montana Representative Troy Downing’s newly introduced “Safeguarding American Property Act” seeks to significantly expand federal detention requirements for undocumented individuals beyond the recently passed Laken Riley Act. The proposal would add property crimes including arson, vandalism, and trespassing to the list of offenses requiring federal custody. This legislation serves as a companion to the Laken Riley Act, which mandates detention of migrants accused of theft and violent crimes against government officials and allows states to challenge federal immigration policies through lawsuits.

“Property rights are a fundamental American value,” said Rep. Troy Downing, highlighting the legislation’s focus on protecting citizens’ property from damage caused by illegal border crossings.

The proposal specifically targets problems faced by rural landowners, particularly those near the southern border who have reported significant property damage from migrants crossing illegally. The Texas Landowner Compensation Program was implemented to address similar concerns, providing financial assistance to agricultural communities impacted by migration-related property damage.

Laken Riley Act Nears Final Approval

The Senate has advanced the Laken Riley Act with a 64-35 vote, with 12 Democrats joining Republicans in support of the legislation. Named after a Georgia student killed allegedly by a Venezuelan man who entered the country illegally, the bill has become a priority for Republican lawmakers and is expected to be the first law signed by President Trump in his new term. The legislation cleared the House with even stronger bipartisan support, passing 263-156 with 46 Democrats voting in favor.

“Obviously border security was a very, very big issue in November’s election,” noted Senate Majority Leader John Thune, explaining the Republican push for strict immigration measures.

The legislation faced opposition from some Democrats who initially supported opening debate but voted against advancing the bill after failing to secure amendments. Critics argue the bill falsely links immigration status with criminal behavior and lacks proper funding for implementation.

Implementation Concerns and Costs

Implementation of both the Laken Riley Act and the proposed Safeguarding American Property Act face significant logistical and financial hurdles. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has expressed concerns about feasibility, citing resource limitations and potential costs. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the Laken Riley Act alone could cost $83 billion over three years, though Republicans contest this figure. Adding property crimes to detention requirements would further strain an already overwhelmed system.

“This bill creates an artificial demand for detention beds while doing nothing to address border surges or enhance safety,” warned Jason Houser, former chief of staff for ICE.

Republicans are considering a funding package through reconciliation that could allocate up to $100 billion for border and immigration enforcement. The legislation also includes a controversial provision allowing state attorneys general to sue the federal government over immigration policies, potentially giving states unprecedented power in setting immigration enforcement priorities. Critics argue this could lead to inconsistent application of federal policy across different states.

Shifting Political Landscape on Immigration

The advancement of these immigration bills reflects a significant shift in the political landscape following recent elections. With Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress and the White House, they are leveraging their position to push through stricter immigration measures. Democrats appear increasingly divided on immigration policy, with some moving toward supporting tougher enforcement measures while others remain concerned about potential civil rights implications for migrants seeking asylum or other relief.

“I think we have to prove that we’re the only party serious about border security,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, highlighting the political calculations Democrats are making in the current environment.

Immigration rights advocates have expressed concerns that the legislation could blur lines between local and federal law enforcement and potentially erode legal protections for immigrants. As these bills move forward, the debate continues over how to balance border security with America’s traditional role as a nation welcoming those seeking a better life.