House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries on Sunday defended Democrats willingness to risk a partial government shutdown in order to impose new restrictions on federal immigration enforcement, even as CNNs Dana Bash underscored that such a move would primarily hit agencies far removed from border operations.
During an appearance on CNNs State of the Union, Bash pressed Jeffries on how Democrats strategy would actually work in practice, noting that a shutdown triggered by their demands would most directly impact the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), according to the Daily Caller.
She questioned how threatening to shutter or hobble those agencies would help Democrats rein in immigration authorities housed within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), particularly when President Donald Trumps One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act has already delivered robust funding for border and immigration enforcement.
Jeffries insisted that Democrats see the spending fight as leverage to force policy changes on DHS and its immigration arms, portraying the confrontation as a necessary stand for civil liberties. Well, our plan is to get there on behalf of the American people. Thats why we need to press forward aggressively and ensure that there are legislative changes enacted as part of any DHS spending bill, because thats the way that you change behavior, Jeffries said.
He framed the proposed restrictions as modest and commonsense, even as they would significantly tighten the rules under which Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operates. And these are commonsense changes, things like mandatory body cameras. Judicial warrants should absolutely be required before ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] agents can storm private property and rip everyday Americans out of their homes in such a violent fashion, he continued, echoing long-standing progressive critiques of immigration enforcement.
Jeffries further argued that ICE should be treated like any other police agency, despite the fact that it already operates under extensive federal oversight and statutory authority. Of course, we need to make sure that there are no masks, so that ICE is conducting itself like every other law enforcement agency in the country. That shouldnt be controversial, Jeffries added.
He then invoked constitutional protections to justify the new constraints, suggesting that current practices fall short of the Fourth Amendments standards, a claim conservatives argue ignores existing warrant requirements and judicial review. It shouldnt be controversial that we are demanding that the Fourth Amendment constitutional protections are adhered to as it relates to the way in which ICE is conducting itself, he said, casting the dispute as a civil-rights battle rather than a straightforward funding debate.
The clash comes less than a year after Congress passed the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act in July 2025, a sweeping measure that thoroughly funded federal law enforcement and border security. That legislation set aside an estimated $170 billion for immigration enforcement and border security, along with roughly $75 billion in supplemental funding for ICE, reflecting a clear mandate for strong border control that Democrats are now seeking to curb through policy riders.
Despite that bipartisan commitment to enforcement, Democrats have intensified their opposition to DHS and ICE amid protests in deep-blue cities such as Minneapolis, where activists erupted after the shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti. Those incidents have become rallying points for the left, which is using them to justify new constraints on federal agents, even if it means jeopardizing paychecks for TSA screeners, FEMA responders, and FAA staff.
Jeffries also pushed for expanded authority for local and state officials to go after federal officers, a move critics warn could politicize law enforcement and undermine national immigration policy. We also need to make sure that state and local officials have the ability to conduct independent investigations, so that, when ICE or CBP or other officers violate the law, they can be investigated and prosecuted and held accountable for those violations of state and local law, not being able to govern themselves with impunity, which is the case right now, Jeffries stated.
Yet even within his own party, there are signs of unease with using a shutdown as a bargaining chip against border enforcement. Nearly two dozen Democrats broke with Jeffries on Tuesday to support a broad funding package that ended a four-day government shutdown, reopening most of the federal government for the remainder of the fiscal year while leaving DHS on a short-term continuing resolution through Feb. 13.
Democrats formal list of demands for DHS now includes mandatory body cameras for federal agents, a ban on face coverings, a requirement for judicial warrants in more enforcement scenarios, and tightened use-of-force standards. The standoff thus pits a Republican-backed framework of strong, well-funded border securityalready enacted through the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Actagainst a Democratic caucus increasingly willing to hold core government services hostage in order to weaken the very agencies tasked with enforcing the nations immigration laws.
Login