The Senate Judiciary Committee voted with a strong bipartisan majority Tuesday evening to advance comprehensive immigration legislation that would put 11 million illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship.

ADVERTISEMENT

The legislation raises caps on high-skilled workers and creates a new visa program for low-skilled workers.

It would allocate billions of dollars to securing the southwestern border and tracking visas at airports and seaports around the country. It would make E-Verify mandatory for employers across the country in order to crack down on illegal workers and deter future waves of illegal immigration

The legislation passed by a vote of 13 to 5 with three Republicans joining 10 Democrats to approve the measure. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Harry Mason ReidSenate Republicans signal openness to working with Biden Mellman: The likely voter sham Bottom line MORE (D-Nev.) has said it will come to the floor next month.

The three Republicans voting "yes" were Sens. Lindsey Graham Lindsey Olin GrahamSenate Republicans signal openness to working with Biden Loeffler calls for hearing in wake of Netflix's 'Cuties' Quinnipiac poll shows Graham, Harrison tied in South Carolina Senate race MORE (S.C.) and Jeff Flake Jeffrey (Jeff) Lane FlakeRepublican former Michigan governor says he's voting for Biden Maybe they just don't like cowboys: The president is successful, some just don't like his style Bush endorsing Biden? Don't hold your breath MORE (Ariz.), who are members of the Gang of Eight, which crafted the bill, and Sen. Orrin Hatch Orrin Grant HatchBottom line Bottom line Senate GOP divided over whether they'd fill Supreme Court vacancy MORE (Utah).

Democrats secured Hatch's support earlier in the day by negotiating a deal to loosen restrictions on H-1B visas for high-skilled workers, which the high-tech industry had lobbied for vigorously.

Sen. Charles Schumer Chuck SchumerDemocrats scramble on COVID-19 relief amid division, Trump surprise Pelosi, Schumer 'encouraged' by Trump call for bigger coronavirus relief package Schumer, Sanders call for Senate panel to address election security MORE (D-N.Y.), the bill’s lead author, touted the three Republican supporters as a promising sign of the floor debate to come.

“This gives us a bipartisan head of steam as we move forward in the Senate. The openness of this process and the sheer number of Republican additions to the bill will go a long way on the Senate floor.”

A crowd of supporters wearing white T-shirts emblazoned with pro-immigrant slogans cheered Schumer and chanted, “Yes, we can,” as he left the hearing room in the Hart Senate Office Building.

Sen. Marco Rubio Marco Antonio RubioHillicon Valley: DOJ indicts Chinese, Malaysian hackers accused of targeting over 100 organizations | GOP senators raise concerns over Oracle-TikTok deal | QAnon awareness jumps in new poll Intelligence chief says Congress will get some in-person election security briefings Republican Senators raise concerns over Oracle-TikTok deal MORE (R-Fla.), a pivotal member of the Gang of Eight, who has spent many hours selling the legislation to skeptical conservatives, applauded the committee’s action, but cautioned the bill still needs work.

“Through an extensive, open and transparent process, they have made real improvements to the bill,” he said. “However, the reality is that work still remains to be done. Immigration reform will not become law unless we can earn the confidence of the American people that we are solving our immigration problems once and for all.”

Some Democratic aides thought they had a shot of picking up a vote from Sen. John Cornyn John CornynSenate Republicans signal openness to working with Biden Hillicon Valley: DOJ indicts Chinese, Malaysian hackers accused of targeting over 100 organizations | GOP senators raise concerns over Oracle-TikTok deal | QAnon awareness jumps in new poll Republican Senators raise concerns over Oracle-TikTok deal MORE (Texas), the second-ranking Senate Republican and a member of the Judiciary panel.

Cornyn has a large population of Hispanics in his state and has spoken of the need to fix the nation’s immigration reform system. But in the end, he voted against the bipartisan bill.

Cornyn grumbled in a Twitter post Tuesday that Democrats had rejected what he called “common sense” amendments to strengthen the U.S.-Mexico border and track biometric data for visa exits.

On Monday, Democrats on the committee voted against Cornyn’s amendment to remove the secretary of Homeland Security’s discretion to waive deportation rules for immigrants found guilty of three misdemeanors.

Throughout the markup, which took place on four days over several weeks, Graham and Flake stuck with Democrats to defeat Republican amendments that would have endangered the bill.

They voted against GOP proposals to implement a system to track visas using biometric data at border crossing points, to drastically increase the number of border patrol agents and aerial drones along the southern border and to require effective control of the borders six months before granting millions of illegal immigrants legal status.

Democrats, however, touted an array of Republican amendments adopted by voice vote to strengthen border security and enforcement provisions. One such amendment, sponsored by Sen. Chuck Grassley Charles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleySenate Republicans signal openness to working with Biden Senators offer disaster tax relief bill Trump spikes political football with return of Big Ten season MORE (R-Iowa), requires U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to submit weekly reports to Immigration and Customs Enforcement on people who fail employment eligibility checks through the E-Verify system.

The cost of the legislation was a source of debate between supporters and opponents of the bill. The conservative Heritage Foundation published a report that it would add $6.3 trillion to the federal deficit over the lifetimes of the millions of illegal immigrants granted legal status.

The bill passed committee without a score from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), a point of concern for Sen. Jeff Sessions Jefferson (Jeff) Beauregard SessionsTrump's policies on refugees are as simple as ABCs Ocasio-Cortez, Velázquez call for convention to decide Puerto Rico status White House officials voted by show of hands on 2018 family separations: report MORE (R-Ala.), a member of Judiciary and the ranking Republican on the Senate Budget Committee.

Sessions sent a letter to CBO in April asking for a long-term estimate of the bill’s costs.

“This bill is bad for workers, bad for taxpayers and — as immigration officers have pleaded for us to hear — a threat to public safety and the rule of law,” Sessions said in closing remarks submitted before the final vote.

One of the biggest questions of Tuesday evening was whether Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy Patrick Joseph LeahyBattle over timing complicates Democratic shutdown strategy Hillicon Valley: Russia 'amplifying' concerns around mail-in voting to undermine election | Facebook and Twitter take steps to limit Trump remarks on voting | Facebook to block political ads ahead of election Top Democrats press Trump to sanction Russian individuals over 2020 election interference efforts MORE (D-Vt.) would call a vote on two amendments he sponsored to extend equal treatment to same-sex couples under immigration law. Leahy ultimately decided not to offer the amendments.

Leahy had reportedly come under pressure from the White House not to offer the amendments, which Republican members of the Gang of Eight threatened would sink the compromise legislation.

Democrats, who control 10 seats on the committee compared to the Republicans’ eight, could have passed the amendment to grant equal rights to same-sex couples. But Republican members of the Gang of Eight warned it would have scuttled the bill.

“All I’m telling you, if it gets on the bill, it’s not going to pass. It’s going to shatter the coalition,” Rubio warned earlier in the day.

One of Leahy’s amendments would have allowed citizens in committed same-sex relationships to sponsor foreign partners for permanent legal status. Another proposal would have exempted immigration law from the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

It would have been an especially tough vote for Schumer, the driving force behind the bill, who is also a sponsor of the Uniting American Families Act, which served as the basis for one of Leahy’s amendments.

Schumer could have defeated Leahy’s amendments by voting “no,” but he had come under intense pressure in recent weeks from gay-rights’ activists to support the measures.

Earlier in the day, Leahy downplayed a report by The Associated Press that the White House had pressed him not to offer the amendments.

“Who in the White House said that? I never discuss conversations I have with the president. I have a lot of conversations, and I doubt if he would,” he said.



—This report was originally published at 8:10 p.m. and last updated at 9:23 p.m.

