https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/22/democrats-ice-funding-bill
Democrats set to vote against ICE bill amid outrage over Trump crackdown
Majority of 213-strong House caucus expected to reject funding bill but party has no plans to enforce whip
Congressional Democrats are expected to overwhelmingly reject a bill to fund ICE, the agency spearheading Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown, amid mounting outrage over its heavy-handed and violent tactics in Minnesota and elsewhere.
Party leaders told a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill on Wednesday that they would vote against the homeland security funding bill, citing insufficient provisions to rein in Immigration Customs and Enforcement, more widely known by its acronym.
Signals for a no vote came from Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic minority leader in the House of Representatives, along with Pete Aguilar, the chairman of the party’s caucus, and Katherine Clark, the chief whip.
Their sentiments are expected to influence the vast majority of the Democrats’ 213-strong House caucus to vote no – although sufficient Democrats are believed to be ready to vote in favor to enable the legislation to pass. The party has no plans to whip its members into line to enforce the leadership view.
The anticipated Democratic thumbs-down comes despite provisions in the bill that keeps the agency’s $10bn annual budget flat, reduces ICE enforcement and removal operations, and imposes a 5,500 reduction to its number of detention beds. The legislation also secured $20m for the “procurement, deployment, and operations of body worn cameras” to be worn by ICE agents, thanks to Democrats’ efforts.
Such palliatives are unlikely to placate anger in the party over the agency’s operations in Minnesota, including the fatal shooting of Renee Good, a mother of three, in Minneapolis, this month.
“In the last 24 hours, we’ve heard our members speak loudly that ICE isn’t doing enough, these reforms aren’t doing enough. This lawlessness has to stop,” Aguilar told reporters after the meeting. “They are only doing this because the president of the United States wants to use them to terrorize communities, to terrorize US citizens.”
Rosa DeLauro, a representative from Connecticut and the ranking Democrat on the appropriations committee, said it was still better for the bill to pass rather than run the risk of a renewed government shutdown that could affect other agencies. “I understand that many of my Democratic colleagues may be dissatisfied with any bill that funds ICE,” she said.
“I share their frustration with the out-of-control agency. I encourage my colleagues to review the bill and determine what is best for their constituents and communities.”
But she added: “The Homeland Security funding bill is more than just ICE. If we allow a lapse in funding, TSA [transportation security administration] agents will be forced to work without pay, Fema [federal emergency management agency] assistance could be delayed, and the US Coast Guard will be adversely affected. All while ICE continues functioning without any change in their operations due to $75 billion it received in the One Big Beautiful Bill.”
At this unsettling time
We hope you appreciated this article. Before you close this tab, we want to ask if you could support the Guardian at this crucial time for journalism in the US. For the next several days only, we are offering 50% off our most impactful monthly support option.
In his first presidency, Donald Trump called journalists the enemy; a year on from his second victory, it’s clear that this time around, he’s treating us like one.
From Hungary to Russia, authoritarian regimes have made silencing independent media one of their defining moves. Sometimes outright censorship isn’t even required to achieve this goal. In the United States, we have seen the administration apply various forms of pressure on news outlets in the year since Trump’s election. One of our great disappointments is how quickly some of the most storied US media organizations have folded when faced with the mere specter of hostility from the administration – long before their hand was forced.
While private news organizations can choose how to respond to this government’s threats, insults and lawsuits, public media has been powerless to stop the defunding of federally supported television and radio. This has been devastating for local and rural communities, who stand to lose not only their primary source of local news and cultural programming, but health and public safety information, including emergency alerts.
While we cannot make up for this loss, the Guardian is proud to make our fact-based work available for free to all, especially when the internet is increasingly flooded with slanted reporting, misinformation and algorithmic drivel.
Being free from billionaire and corporate ownership means the Guardian will never compromise our independence – but it also means we rely on support from readers who understand how essential it is to have news sources that are immune to intimidation from the powerful. We know our requests for support are not as welcome as our reporting, but without them, it’s simple: our reporting wouldn’t exist. Of course, we understand that some readers are not in a position to support us, and if that is you, we value your readership no less.
But if you are able, please support us today. All gifts are gratefully received, but for the next several days only, we are offering a rare 50% discount for six months off our most impactful monthly support option. (Among the great benefits you get in return: you’ll see far fewer annoying fundraising messages like this.) It takes just 37 seconds to set up. Thank you for considering.
No comments:
Post a Comment