Democrats threaten to sink DHS funding over ICE reforms

House and Senate Democrats in both chambers are publicly threatening to oppose the Homeland Security portion of a bipartisan, multibill spending package unless Congress enacts binding reforms to Immigration and Customs Enforcement practices. The dispute has turned the DHS measure into the primary flashpoint in efforts to avert a partial government shutdown at the end of the month.

The 1,059-page package bundles funding for the Pentagon and the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security, and includes health-care provisions such as expanded oversight of pharmacy benefit managers. Lawmakers drafted the bill to provide budget stability through September and to avoid a shutdown ahead of the 2026 midterms. But Democratic opposition to ICE-related language means the Homeland Security section now faces an uncertain path.

Progressive leaders have led the charge. Rep. Pramila Jayapal said the Homeland Security bill “simply does not meet the moment.” Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar have signaled firm resistance; Omar said the Congressional Progressive Caucus “has adopted an official position to hold ICE accountable” and that “our caucus members will oppose all funding for immigration enforcement in any appropriations bills until meaningful reforms are enacted.” The caucus, which formally opposes new DHS funding absent reforms, is variously described within congressional ranks as numbering dozens, with estimates ranging from more than 70 to nearly 100 members.

The push for reforms intensified after an ICE officer shot and killed a Minneapolis woman, identified in some accounts as Renee Good. Federal officials have characterized the killing as an act of self-defense, while the Minneapolis mayor called the shooting reckless and unnecessary. That episode has strengthened demands for oversight measures that activists and many Democrats say are missing from the current bill.

Democrats’ reform requests include stricter oversight of immigration agents, requirements for ICE agents to wear body cameras, increased inspections of facilities, and other funding guardrails. Rep. Ted Lieu, No. 4 House Democrat, said he would be a “hard no” on the DHS bill if it does not include reforms to restrain ICE. Even some centrists and swing-district Democrats have expressed conditional opposition; Rep. Adam Gray, a Blue Dog, said agencies are “so unresponsive” and suggested he could vote against the measure to force accountability despite being “generally supportive” and saying he “could go either way.”

Appropriations leaders have sought to defuse the standoff by separating the Homeland Security text from other spending bills, allowing House Republican leaders to hold a standalone vote on DHS. Appropriations Chair Tom Cole has warned that substantive changes to Homeland Security funding would require sign-on from the White House, limiting unilateral alterations by congressional negotiators.

The draft bill does include some concessions. Top House Appropriations Democrats say the proposal reduces ICE enforcement and removal operations funding by $115 million and cuts authorized ICE detention beds by 5,500. Those reductions and added oversight provisions have not satisfied progressives demanding legally enforceable reforms.

With Republicans holding 53 Senate seats, the Senate will need 60 votes to advance the measures, meaning Democratic unity or splits will determine the fate of DHS funding. Lawmakers are exploring procedural options short of full blockage, including separate votes, attaching conditions to funding, and seeking White House agreement on changes. Meanwhile, about 70 House Democrats have signed onto an effort to pursue impeachment of the Homeland Security secretary, underscoring the high political stakes.

As negotiations continue, the intersection of enforcement policy, accountability demands, and shutdown avoidance will test intraparty cohesion and legislative strategy in the coming days.