Capitol Showdown: Democrats Stall Homeland Funding Over ICE Uproar

Paul Riverbank, 1/15/2026In a rare bipartisan move, the House advanced a crucial funding package — yet deep divisions over Homeland Security and ICE reforms loom, threatening gridlock as lawmakers race against a shutdown deadline.

For a moment, the usual partisan rancor seemed to take a back seat. Deadlines being what they are, both parties decided, at least this time, to set aside the kind of entrenched disputes that usually stall progress. One observer captured the mood: “Those backroom talks, tense and awkward as they were, pulled in even the skeptical members and managed to quiet the opposition—if only temporarily.” Even so, behind that show of unity were spirited disagreements, especially after midnight, when tempers fray and patience thins.

This new legislation offers more than a quick fix. It shores up critical agencies—think the State Department, Treasury, IRS, and national security outposts. These are the levers that, if abruptly jammed, send shockwaves well beyond federal buildings in downtown D.C. But there’s a conspicuous gap in what the bill covers: funding for the Department of Homeland Security never made it to the finish line.

Originally, DHS was supposed to be part of the bundle. But events in Minneapolis quickly changed the calculus—a fatal shooting involving an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer transformed the debates overnight. House Democrats, galvanized by the incident, pressed for reforms to ICE. Staunch resistance from many Republicans brought things to a halt. As a senior Democrat confided privately, “We’re not blinking unless real rules are on the table for ICE.”

That standoff forced GOP leaders to carve DHS out altogether. Tom Cole, the Republican chair of the House Appropriations Committee, put it bluntly: “There isn’t an appetite to force the issue right now when the stakes around Homeland are this volatile.” Lawmakers will circle back to the DHS bill, perhaps tacking it onto another package or authorizing a stopgap to keep essential services running in the interim.

No sooner had that decision settled than conservatives, alert to their growing leverage, secured votes on a pair of amendments. Chip Roy of Texas championed one to slash nearly a fifth from the D.C. Court of Appeals' budget and eliminate two judges’ salaries altogether. Eli Crane of Arizona pushed another aiming to cut support for the National Endowment for Democracy. Neither is likely to pass untouched by opposition, but the debates they sparked were unmistakably raw.

Presently, just three out of twelve government funding bills have cleared the House, and four—including those covering agriculture, Congress itself, and military projects—have made it through both chambers and received presidential signatures. That leaves a great deal undone, as January 30, the critical date, comes into sharper focus.

The next few weeks are set to test Congress’s capacity for compromise even further. The Senate, for its part, is finalizing its own combination package, covering Commerce, Justice, and the EPA among others—just as both chambers are preparing to scatter for scheduled recesses. These upcoming breaks compress the negotiating window uncomfortably. The public, meanwhile, is all too familiar with the gamesmanship that often leads to last-ditch, late-night agreements or—worse—a lapse in government funding altogether.

Voices on both sides are already bracing for what’s now a common fallback: the continuing resolution, that temporary glue Congress uses when real deals can’t be struck in time. “I don’t love it, but a short patch for Homeland Security may be what gets us through,” Cole admitted matter-of-factly. He didn’t dismiss the possibility of flat funding for the full year either, which could mean a status quo that fails to reflect new challenges.

From the outside, Americans weary of these periodic crises might wonder if anything in Washington ever really changes. But for those in the maze of marble hallways, this moment of fragile bipartisanship offers at least some proof that, under pressure, lawmakers can still—sometimes—keep the engine running. The real test is whether this sliver of cooperation has legs, or if, once again, the Capitol's lights are left flickering as deadlines bear down.

A sense of restlessness pervaded the corridors of Congress this past week, as lawmakers once again confronted a scenario they know all too well: the threat of a government shutdown looming on the calendar's edge. On Wednesday night, an unexpected chord of unity reverberated through the House chamber—rare enough to warrant mention—where members, often at odds, managed to corral enough agreement to shepherd a funding package for the Treasury and State departments across the line. The final tally—341 votes to 79—wasn't exactly a photo finish.For a moment, the usual partisan rancor seemed to take a back seat. Deadlines being what they are, both parties decided, at least this time, to set aside the kind of entrenched disputes that usually stall progress. One observer captured the mood: “Those backroom talks, tense and awkward as they were, pulled in even the skeptical members and managed to quiet the opposition—if only temporarily.” Even so, behind that show of unity were spirited disagreements, especially after midnight, when tempers fray and patience thins.This new legislation offers more than a quick fix. It shores up critical agencies—think the State Department, Treasury, IRS, and national security outposts. These are the levers that, if abruptly jammed, send shockwaves well beyond federal buildings in downtown D.C. But there’s a conspicuous gap in what the bill covers: funding for the Department of Homeland Security never made it to the finish line.Originally, DHS was supposed to be part of the bundle. But events in Minneapolis quickly changed the calculus—a fatal shooting involving an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer transformed the debates overnight. House Democrats, galvanized by the incident, pressed for reforms to ICE. Staunch resistance from many Republicans brought things to a halt. As a senior Democrat confided privately, “We’re not blinking unless real rules are on the table for ICE.”That standoff forced GOP leaders to carve DHS out altogether. Tom Cole, the Republican chair of the House Appropriations Committee, put it bluntly: “There isn’t an appetite to force the issue right now when the stakes around Homeland are this volatile.” Lawmakers will circle back to the DHS bill, perhaps tacking it onto another package or authorizing a stopgap to keep essential services running in the interim.No sooner had that decision settled than conservatives, alert to their growing leverage, secured votes on a pair of amendments. Chip Roy of Texas championed one to slash nearly a fifth from the D.C. Court of Appeals' budget and eliminate two judges’ salaries altogether. Eli Crane of Arizona pushed another aiming to cut support for the National Endowment for Democracy. Neither is likely to pass untouched by opposition, but the debates they sparked were unmistakably raw.Presently, just three out of twelve government funding bills have cleared the House, and four—including those covering agriculture, Congress itself, and military projects—have made it through both chambers and received presidential signatures. That leaves a great deal undone, as January 30, the critical date, comes into sharper focus.The next few weeks are set to test Congress’s capacity for compromise even further. The Senate, for its part, is finalizing its own combination package, covering Commerce, Justice, and the EPA among others—just as both chambers are preparing to scatter for scheduled recesses. These upcoming breaks compress the negotiating window uncomfortably. The public, meanwhile, is all too familiar with the gamesmanship that often leads to last-ditch, late-night agreements or—worse—a lapse in government funding altogether.Voices on both sides are already bracing for what’s now a common fallback: the continuing resolution, that temporary glue Congress uses when real deals can’t be struck in time. “I don’t love it, but a short patch for Homeland Security may be what gets us through,” Cole admitted matter-of-factly. He didn’t dismiss the possibility of flat funding for the full year either, which could mean a status quo that fails to reflect new challenges.From the outside, Americans weary of these periodic crises might wonder if anything in Washington ever really changes. But for those in the maze of marble hallways, this moment of fragile bipartisanship offers at least some proof that, under pressure, lawmakers can still—sometimes—keep the engine running. The real test is whether this sliver of cooperation has legs, or if, once again, the Capitol's lights are left flickering as deadlines bear down.