As the partial government shutdown surpasses one month, Democrats are advocating for funding the Department of Homeland Security while excluding Immigration and Customs Enforcement from any new financial agreements.
As the partial government shutdown continues beyond the one-month mark, Democrats in Congress are pushing for a funding strategy that would support the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) while excluding Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This stance has drawn criticism from Republicans, who argue that such a position is untenable.
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat from Rhode Island, stated, “We already said we’d open everything in the department except ICE, so the answer is yes.” He accused Republicans of holding national security “hostage” in their refusal to agree to partial funding.
Representative Ro Khanna, a Democrat from California, echoed Whitehouse’s sentiments, emphasizing the need to fund all aspects of DHS except for ICE. “We’re going to fight on the ICE funding. I mean, they already have $75 billion,” Khanna noted, referencing the funding ICE received through previous appropriations during Donald Trump’s administration.
Republicans, however, contend that Democrats have adopted an unsustainable position by rejecting full funding for DHS. Representative Brian Mast, a Republican from Florida, criticized the Democrats’ approach, stating, “They’re not interested in reopening, right? Their whole thing is: ‘Okay, we’re doing a shutdown to go out there and affect ICE and Border Patrol.’ But ICE and Border Patrol are the ones that are not even affected by this shutdown.” He pointed out that these agencies are funded by a previous bill that passed with bipartisan support.
The calls for a partial funding approach have intensified since the shutdown began. Funding for DHS originally lapsed on February 14 when Democrats refused to advance spending legislation that did not include specific demands for reforming ICE. These demands include a ban on masks for ICE agents, stricter warrant requirements for apprehending suspects in public, and a prohibition on roaming patrols.
Republicans have rejected these demands, arguing that they would hinder President Trump’s immigration enforcement efforts. The current political standoff has significant implications, as Republicans require at least seven Democratic votes to overcome a filibuster in the Senate, where they hold only 53 seats.
The ongoing shutdown has raised concerns among Republicans regarding the nation’s preparedness to respond to domestic threats. Recent incidents, including a vehicle-ramming attack at a synagogue in Michigan, a university shooting in Virginia, attempted bombings in New York, and another shooting in Texas, have prompted some Democrats, such as Seth Magaziner from Rhode Island, to advocate for passing non-ICE funding for DHS.
“If it takes more time to negotiate those changes to ICE, then the right thing to do is to fund the rest of DHS, TSA, Coast Guard, FEMA, counterterrorism, all of that, while we continue to negotiate over ICE,” Magaziner said.
Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut, has also expressed support for this position. He stated, “Ready, willing, and eager to approve funding for TSA, for FEMA, and for the Coast Guard through the separate bill that we’ve offered and Republicans have rejected. There’s an easy solution here.”
The impasse continues as both parties remain entrenched in their positions, with the future of DHS funding and the fate of ICE hanging in the balance. The ongoing discussions reflect broader ideological divides over immigration policy and national security priorities.
According to Fox News, the resolution of this standoff will require significant negotiation and compromise from both sides to ensure the continued functioning of critical government services.