Search people, articles, bills, and more
The Senate agreed to limit debate on whether to take up the Laken Riley Act (S. 5), voting 84-9. This vote was about proceeding to the bill, not whether to pass it.
The Senate voted on cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 5, the Laken Riley Act. In plain terms, senators were deciding whether to end debate on taking up the bill. The motion was agreed to, 84-9, clearing the 60-vote requirement. That allowed the Senate to move forward to consider the bill; it did not itself pass the bill.
The Senate later passed S. 5 on January 22, and it became law on January 29, 2025.
OPEN BILL →Why it matters. The vote cleared a procedural step that allowed the Senate to consider a bill changing detention requirements in some immigration cases and giving state attorneys general a way to sue federal agencies over certain immigration enforcement issues.
Who’s affected. Certain non-citizens who are inadmissible and charged with or admit to specified crimes: The law requires federal authorities to detain people in this group. · State attorneys general and federal immigration agencies: State attorneys general may bring certain lawsuits against federal agencies over alleged immigration-law violations that harm their state or residents.
Democrats. 32 voted yes, 8 voted no, and 5 did not vote; the Democratic majority position was yes.
Republicans. 51 voted yes and 1 did not vote; the Republican majority position was yes.
On Cloture on the Motion to Proceed S. 5
Jan 9, 2025
The Senate agreed to limit debate on whether to take up the Laken Riley Act (S.
5), voting 84-9. This vote was about proceeding to the bill, not whether to pass it.
Cloture is a vote to limit debate. Here, it applied to the motion about whether to take up S. 5, not to the bill itself. The motion needed 60 votes, and it received 84.
The Senate later passed S. 5 on January 22, and it became law on January 29, 2025.
The vote cleared a procedural step that allowed the Senate to consider a bill changing detention requirements in some immigration cases and giving state attorneys general a way to sue federal agencies over certain immigration enforcement issues.
Both parties’ majorities voted yes, and the vote was not party-line: Democrats split, while nearly all Republicans voted yes. The two independents split their votes.
32 voted yes, 8 voted no, and 5 did not vote; the Democratic majority position was yes.
51 voted yes and 1 did not vote; the Republican majority position was yes.
One voted yes and one voted no.




























