The Senate is heading into a high-stakes week as Majority Leader John Thune schedules a test vote on a six-bill funding package that includes DHS funding, Republicans refuse to strip the DHS title, and Democrats are demanding major changes after a Border Patrol shooting shifted political winds. Tensions over immigration enforcement, judicial warrants for ICE arrests, and the risk of a partial government shutdown with a January 30 deadline are all colliding in the Senate. This article lays out the players, the demands, the likely clashes, and what the immediate calendar means for funding and enforcement. Expect blunt negotiation, firm Republican lines, and a showdown on whether policy changes will cost funding for the Pentagon and other agencies.
Senate Democrats have publicly signaled they will not back the current DHS funding language unless significant changes are made, a stance that has hardened since a Border Patrol shooting in Minneapolis left a protester dead. Some Democrats are pushing to remove or rewrite DHS provisions as a condition for supporting the package, which immediately raises the stakes for keeping the rest of government funded. Republicans view those demands as a wholesale reordering of priorities that could trigger a partial shutdown if pushed through now. The dynamic has turned a routine appropriations maneuver into a test of priorities and a fight over enforcement powers.
After the shooting, Sen. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer made his position plain in blunt terms. He said, “Democrats sought common sense reforms in the Department of Homeland Security spending bill, but because of Republicans’ refusal to stand up to President Trump, the DHS bill is woefully inadequate to rein in the abuses of ICE. I will vote no.” He then added, “Senate Democrats will not provide the votes to proceed to the appropriations bill if the DHS funding bill is included.” Those quotes underscore the demand to decouple DHS from the broader package or to rewrite enforcement rules entirely.
Republicans, led on procedure by Sen. John Thune, are refusing to let the DHS title be stripped or radically altered in a way that would unravel the rest of the six-bill package. On Tuesday, Thune scheduled a test vote for Thursday to see whether the chamber can proceed and to give negotiators time to find common ground. The goal from the GOP side is to preserve comprehensive funding for multiple federal agencies, including defense, without allowing a single policy fight over DHS to jeopardize broader appropriations. From a Republican perspective, chopping up the package would invite a government shutdown that could have avoided serious harm to national security spending.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., on Tuesday teed up a key test vote for the six-bill package for Thursday. The move allows Senate Republicans time to hash out a deal with Senate Democrats, who are demanding several restrictions on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Republicans are eager to find a middle ground that doesn’t involve modifying the current funding package, given that doing so would almost guarantee a government shutdown and jeopardize funding to several other federal agencies, including the Pentagon.
But Democrats aren’t willing to budge, for now, until the DHS bill is stripped and sidelined.
One demand reportedly on the table from Democrats would dramatically constrain ICE operations, requiring judicial warrants for all ICE arrests, a change that would fundamentally alter how federal immigration enforcement works. Critics in the Senate GOP warn that this would remove a large number of enforcement targets and limit ICE to pursuing only federal crimes that occur after illegal entry. That approach would effectively hand control of enforcement priorities to the courts and could paralyze ICE’s ability to act on state-level crimes tied to illegal entrants.
If reports are true that Dems are demanding judicial warrants for all ICE arrests as part of DHS funding bill, that will take a massive amount of targets off the board for ICE. They would only be able to go after illegal immigrants who have committed a new *federal* crime *after* entering the U.S. illegally.
State & local crimes would not apply. (Feds don’t enforce state & local).
For instance, if an illegal immigrant gets arrested in Minnesota for a DUI crash causing great bodily injury (state crime) and bonds out of jail, ICE would not be able to target him for arrest because there would be no judicial warrant (not a federal crime).
ICE would not be able to target anyone for just being in the U.S. illegally. They would have to wait for a federal crime to be committed, then a federal judge would have to sign off on probable cause for arrest.
It would cripple any hopes of “mass deportations” or widespread immigration enforcement.
The calendar is simple and unforgiving: the deadline to prevent a partial shutdown is January 30. With only days to go, Senate leaders are navigating between the risk of losing funding for military and domestic programs and the pressure to respond to high-profile incidents that ramp up calls for policy change. Negotiators will need to move quickly if they hope to avoid a funding lapse that would harm vital operations across the government.
Editor’s Note: Thanks to President Trump, illegal immigration into our great country has virtually stopped. Despite the radical left’s lies, new legislation wasn’t needed to secure our border, just a new president.
Add comment