Seven House Democrats flipped their votes to “yes” on a GOP-led bill named after the slain Georgia student Laken Riley that would require detention of migrants arrested for theft.

The Laken Riley Act became the first House bill passed this year, clearing the lower chamber in a 264-159 vote, with 48 Democrats joining all Republicans in support.

The legislation was originally passed in the House by Republicans and 37 Democrats in March but failed to pass the Democratic-led Senate.

Reps. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), Val Hoyle (D-Ore.), Lucy McBath (D-Ga.), Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.), Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) and Terri Sewell (D-Ala.) voted “yes” on Tuesday after voting “no” in March. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) previously did not vote on the matter but voted “yes” on Tuesday.

Eleven new Democratic votes came from freshmen legislators, while four who voted in favor of the bill in March are no longer in the House: Colin Allred (D-Texas), Yadira Caraveo (D-Colo.), Matt Cartwright (D-Pa.) and Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), who was sworn into the Senate last week.

Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) originally voted yes on the legislation but on Tuesday he did not vote.

The bill requires detention of migrants, including those who have been permitted to seek asylum in the U.S., if they have been accused of theft, burglary or shoplifting. It was named after Riley, who was killed by a Venezuelan migrant who was arrested for shoplifting before the attack.

Notably, the newest text of the legislation did not include condemnations of President Biden, his actions after Riley’s death and the Biden administration’s immigration policies a change that may have swayed some in the party.

Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), the chair of the House Democratic Caucus, said in a press conference after the vote that it was clear House Republicans are pushing an “anti-immigrant agenda.”

“There are serious flaws in this bill, it did not go through the normal judicial process,” Aguilar said in response to a question about the increase in Democratic support. “I voted against this because it opens a path for individuals through DACA who could be deported and that’s a concern to me.”