Republicans are on the verge of giving President-elect Trump a big win on immigration to kick off his second term — and doing it with the help of Democrats while dividing the minority party on the hot-button issue. The GOP spent years pillorying the Biden administration for being weak on the border and immigration, with that drumbeat helping them ascend to power this year.  It was no surprise then that the first major bill Republicans put forward was the Laken Riley Act, a bill named after a Georgia college student who was killed last year by a man who had entered the country illegally. The legislation kills two birds with one stone: giving Republicans a win on the border while putting Democrats in a tough spot as they attempt to navigate the issue following the November shellacking.  “Some Democrats seem to have learned from the election that maybe we missed this one. Maybe we missed just how big a deal the open border was to Americans,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said. “They have their opportunity now to sort of redeem themselves on it.”  As many as 11 Senate Democrats are expected to vote with every Republican to pass the bill this week. Ten voted to end debate and advance the measure Friday. It is also slated to get a vote in the House this week, where it picked up support from 48 Democrats earlier this month. The legislation would mandate federal detention of immigrants without legal status who are accused of theft, burglary and assaulting a law enforcement officer, among other things.  The political stakes were also immediately clear as four key Senate Democrats who are up in 2026 — Sens. Jon Ossoff (Ga.), Gary Peters (Mich.), Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.) and Mark Warner (Va.) — voted to advance the package. Two Democrats — Sens. John Fetterman (Pa.) and Ruben Gallego (Ariz.) — were among its co-sponsors. But the past week also brought to the forefront key divisions within the Democratic caucus on an issue that continues to give the party plenty of headaches. On Tuesday, the Senate Democratic Conference held a longer-than-usual luncheon during which members had what one Democrat described as a “pretty intense discussion” about the bill. One specific concern centered on the lack of a cohesive plan for how Democrats should handle the legislation. Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) became animated on that topic during the luncheon, two Senate Democrats told The Hill. “He was really wound up about the fact that we had no plan that was coherent,” a second Senate Democrat said. Bennet confirmed that sentiment, saying that he “expressed [his] frustration about our strategy.”  Creating more issues for the party was that at least seven Senate Democrats indicated early on that they were prepared to vote for the Laken Riley Act in its original form. Sens. Mark Kelly (Ariz.), Jacky Rosen (Nev.), Elissa Slotkin (Mich.), Fetterman, Gallego, Ossoff and Peters all indicated as much heading into the initial procedural vote.  Dozens of other Democrats voted to open debate on the bill, saying they hoped to amend it. But that initial show of support effectively zapped any leverage Democrats may have had over the legislation or possible amendments, prompting Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to only bring two of them to the floor.  “I want to have this [amendment] process as open as possible,” Thune said. “My impression was … the Democrats were sort of anxious to get it behind them.”  The lone Democratic amendment was defeated, and he teed up Friday’s vote to end debate shortly after.  “If a handful of people say, ‘Yeah, I’m going to go along with this,’ then Chuck has lost all of his negotiating leverage before we ever get started. … If we don’t use the little bit of leverage we’ve got, we’re toast,” the second Senate Democrat said, noting that issue and an internal dispute about child imprisonment related to the bill were the main points of contention in the caucus. “Both of those were intense vectors of dispute,” they added. Those were both on top of questions surrounding the cost of the bill and how it would be enforced. The Department of Homeland Security said this week that the proposal would cost nearly $27 billion in the first year and that it “would be impossible for [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] to execute within existing resources.” Nearly three dozen Democrats voted against ending debate Friday after only two amendments hit the floor. Ten Democrats — not including Fetterman, a co-sponsor — ultimately voted alongside every Republican who was present.  “It’s an issue that I think has tremendous resonance and clearly broad support in the public,” Thune said. “It’s a very hard vote for Democrats.”  Republicans, meanwhile, saw the bill as a way to get off on the right foot this Congress, especially after lawmakers struggled to take any steps on immigration in recent years despite the uptick in border crossings. That included the failed bipartisan border bill that Trump and conservatives killed last year.  Sen. Katie Britt (Ala.), a lead GOP proponent of the Laken Riley Act, complained that the Senate Judiciary Committee did not mark up any immigration or border bills during the 118th Congress.  “I think it’s a big day for America. If you look at what happened on Nov. 5 … people spoke loud and clear that they wanted something different,” Britt said, adding that she was encouraged by the Democratic support for the bill.  To some Republicans, the Laken Riley votes are serving as a solid barometer of the level of cooperation they should expect in the coming weeks and months.  “If people are genuinely supportive of the bill, they should be willing to take the heat that I did when I’m asking a minority of my conference to vote for a bill that all Democrats were going to vote for,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who was involved in immigration-related bipartisan talks in recent years.  “This is a great test for that,” he said. “It will give me a great indication whether or not I have anybody to work with.”