Democrats tank DHS bill again, likely triggering partial govt shutdown
Democrats in the U.S. Senate tanked the Homeland Security full-year funding bill in a last-ditch vote Thursday, all but guaranteeing a partial government shutdown starting Saturday.
This is the second time in less than six months that Democrats have forced a shutdown over policy demands, with the holdup this time centered around immigration enforcement measures.
All but Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., refused to fund the Department of Homeland Security unless an “overhaul” to Immigrations and Customs Enforcement is included in the bill, the last remaining fiscal year 2026 appropriations bill.
“Democrats have said it from the start: We need legislation to rein in ICE and end the violence,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., posted on X after his party blocked the advancement of the House-passed bill.
“Without legislation, what Tom Homan says today could be reversed tomorrow on a whim from Donald Turmp [sic]. We will not support a DHS bill that perpetuates the status quo,” Schumer added, referring to the administration ending the immigration enforcement surge in Minneapolis, where two American protestors were fatally shot by ICE agents.
Unlike the other DHS agencies, however, ICE will not even be impacted by a lapse in DHS funding. The agency is already funded for the rest of the Trump administration regardless of annual appropriations, due to a $75 billion boost from Republicans’ budget reconciliation bill.
“Instead of negotiating in good faith, [Democrats are] going to allow TSA agents, FEMA workers, members of our Coast Guard, and countless others to go without a paycheck because they would rather posture to their base,” Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., said.
Due to the ICE controversies, Senate Republicans had agreed to strip the Homeland Security bill from a larger funding package and replace it with a two-week funding extension, buying time to negotiate reforms.
With the parties failing to reach a compromise, that Continuing Resolution will expire after midnight Friday, forcing all DHS agencies but ICE to scale back all but the most necessary operations and withhold pay from employees.
Democrats’ demands include prohibiting DHS agents from wearing masks, racially profiling, indiscriminately arresting people, tracking protestors, or entering private property without a judicial warrant in addition to an immigration court warrant.
Other demanded changes include requiring agents to display ID, wear body cameras, and obtain the consent of states and localities to conduct large-scale operations, among other things.
While Republicans and the White House are open to some of these changes, such as body-worn cameras, they have flatly refused others, such as additional warrant requirements.
“I’m not sure if Democrats thought the White House would just accede to every one of their demands or what, but they cannot reasonably expect to reach an agreement without actual negotiation with give and take from both sides,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said Thursday.
“Democrats are never going to get their full wish list. That’s not the way this works,” Thune added. “[Republicans] will not agree to measures that make it impossible … for law enforcement officers to do their jobs.”
Latest News Stories
Frankfort Park District Approves Settlement with Five Oaks HOA, Pending Homeowner Vote
Spirit of Thanksgiving in Galveston: Resilience, rebirth, renewal out of rubble
Feds criticized for excluding health care from student loan caps
Two National Guard members shot near White House
Trump election interference case in Georgia dismissed
New park fee for foreign tourists could generate hundreds of millions
CDL proposals focus on safety as American truckers lose jobs, wages
Trump’s proposed $2,000 tariff rebates face costly challenges
Trump’s legal fees could fall on the backs of Fulton County taxpayers
Revenues from energy production at $14.6B for 2025
IL congressman’s retirement announcement sparks calls for election fixes
WATCH: Trump calls Pritzker ‘fat slob;’ Talk of reviving progressive tax criticized