By Richard Cowan
WASHINGTON, Jan 27 (Reuters) – Funding for the Department of Homeland Security and several other US government agencies could expire this week if Republicans and Democrats in the US Congress do not resolve a dispute over the aggressive enforcement efforts of immigration agents.
WHY IS ICE SOMETHING CONTROVERSIAL?
President Donald Trump is making a massive campaign to deport immigrants who are in the country illegally, which has also affected some immigrants with legal status and American citizens.
The Trump administration has added agents in several Democratic-led cities including Los Angeles, Chicago, Charlotte, and most recently Minneapolis and St.
In Minneapolis, residents were angered by several incidents, including the killing of two American citizens, the detention of an American citizen who was taken from his home in his shorts, and the detention of school children, including a 5-year-old boy.
Meanwhile, six deaths in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention centers are known to have occurred this month.
WHAT DO THE DEMOCRATS WANT?
Democrats have been calling for tighter controls on the operations and practices of immigration agents. After Saturday’s shooting of the American citizen Alex Pretti, they are asking that such reforms be attached to the legislation that finances the Department of Internal Security until September.
That bill was approved last week in the House of Representatives over the objection of most Democrats. The DHS funding was attached to broader legislation that also funds agencies ranging from the Department of Defense to those that operate medical research, housing and education programs.
Democrats are seeking: a ban on ICE detentions or deportations of US citizens; a ban on masks worn by ICE agents; requirement to wear body cameras; explicit prohibitions on the excessive use of force; prohibitions on raids of churches, mosques, synagogues and other places of worship, as well as hospitals and schools; and no absolute immunity from prosecution of agents who breach a code of conduct.
Other Democrats have also urged improved training for agents and requiring court-issued warrants for immigration searches and detentions.
Democrats are also seeking to separate DHS spending from the larger package, to avoid disruptions to other agencies. They offered to agree to a temporary funding measure to provide more time for both parties to find a compromise on additional ICE restrictions.
WHAT DO THE REPUBLICANS WANT?
Republicans do not want to change the funding bill and are pushing to pass it in the Senate by the January 30 deadline.
Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, said Monday that the sweeping package already contains guardrails over ICE’s behavior.
For example, it provides $20 million for body-worn cameras, establishes protections for pregnant women in DHS custody, and prohibits the destruction of evidence involving the deaths of people in custody.
WHAT HAPPENS IF A DEAL IS NOT ACHIEVED?
Immigration enforcement is unlikely to be affected. During the last shutdown in October, DHS considered 258,000 of its 272,000 employees “essential,” meaning they remained on the job after funding expired. While essential employees typically go unpaid during a shutdown, the Trump administration has continued pay for immigration agents and other federal law enforcement.
DHS has another funding stream as well. Last year’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which was opposed by most Democrats, includes $75 billion in additional funding for ICE that would allow it to significantly increase the size of its workforce and expand detention facilities, as DHS aims to meet Trump’s goal of deporting one million people each year.
That money would be available even if Congress does not pass the DHS funding bill.
WHAT’S NEXT?
A large and widespread winter storm hampered lawmakers’ ability to return to Washington to work on spending legislation. Senators are expected back in town late Tuesday, and Republicans and Democrats on Wednesday are scheduled to hold their own separate political dinners. That will be the next opportunity for the 53 Republican senators and 47 members of the Democratic Caucus to try to devise their strategies in this battle.
(Reporting by Richard Cowan; Editing by Andy Sullivan; Editing by Alistair Bell)