Skip to main content

Partial shutdown seems increasingly likely as Democrats demand ICE changes

WASHINGTON (AP) — With a partial government shutdown looming, Senate Democrats laid out a list of demands Wednesday for the Department of Homeland Security, including an enforceable code of conduct for federal agents conducting immigration arrests and a requirement that officers show identification as the country reels from the deaths of two protesters at the hands of federal agents in Minneapolis.

It remained unclear if President Donald Trump and Republicans would be willing to meet those demands, even as funding for DHS and a swath of other government agencies was at risk of expiring Saturday. Irate Democrats have pledged to block a spending bill unless their demands for reforms are met.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said Wednesday that the legislation won’t pass until U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is “reined in and overhauled.”

“The American people support law enforcement, they support border security, they do not support ICE terrorizing our streets and killing American citizens,” Schumer said.

With an uncertain path ahead, the standoff threatened to plunge the country into another shutdown just two months after Democrats blocked a spending bill over expiring federal health care subsidies, a dispute that closed the government for 43 days as Republicans refused to negotiate. That shutdown ended when a small group of moderate Democrats broke away to strike a deal with Republicans, but Democrats are more united this time after the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good by federal agents.

There’s a lot of “unanimity and shared purpose” within the Democratic caucus, Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith said after a lunch meeting Wednesday.

“Boil it all down, what we are talking about is that these lawless ICE agents should be following the same rules that your local police department does,” Smith said. “There has to be accountability.”

Democrats lay out their demands

As the administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement surge goes on, Schumer said Democrats are asking the White House to “end roving patrols” in cities and coordinate with local law enforcement on immigration arrests, including requiring tighter rules for warrants.

Democrats also want an enforceable code of conduct so agents are held accountable when they violate rules. Schumer said agents should be required to have “masks off, body cameras on” and carry proper identification, as is common practice in most law enforcement agencies.

The Democratic caucus is united in those “commonsense reforms” and the burden is on Republicans to accept them, Schumer said. He has asked Republicans to separate out the Homeland Security bill from the others to avoid a broader shutdown.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has said he was waiting for Democrats to outline what they want, and he suggested that they need to be negotiating with the White House. He indicated that he might be open to some of their demands, but encouraged Democrats and the White House to talk and find agreement.

Many obstacles to a deal

It was unclear whether Trump would weigh in, or how seriously the White House was engaged — or whether the two sides could agree on anything that would satisfy Democrats.

The White House had invited some Democrats for a discussion to better understand their positions and avoid a partial government shutdown, a senior White House official said, but the meeting did not happen. The official requested anonymity to discuss the private invitation.

With no serious negotiations underway, a partial shutdown appeared increasingly likely starting Saturday.

The House passed the six remaining funding bills last week and sent them to the Senate as a package, and that makes it difficult to strip out the homeland security portion as Democrats are demanding. Republicans could break the package apart with the consent of all 100 senators, which would be complicated, or through a series of votes that would extend past the Friday deadline.

Even if the Senate could resolve the issue, House Republicans have made clear they do not want any changes to the bill they have passed. In a letter to Trump on Tuesday, the conservative House Freedom Caucus wrote that its members stand with the president and ICE.

“The package will not come back through the House without funding for the Department of Homeland Security,” according to the letter.

Republican opposition

Several Republican senators have said they would be fine with Democrats’ request to separate the Homeland Security funds for further debate and pass the other bills in the package. But it was unlikely that Democrats would find broad GOP support for their demands on ICE.

North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis said he’s OK with separating the bills, but opposed to the Democrats’ proposal to require the immigration enforcement officers to unmask and show their faces, even as he blamed Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem for decisions that he said are “tarnishing” the agency’s reputation.

“The thing about the masks, I really do disagree,” Tillis said. “You know, there’s a lot of vicious people out there, and they’ll take a picture of your face, and the next thing you know, your children or your wife or your husband are being threatened at home. And that’s just the reality of the world that we’re in.”

Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas said that “what happened over the weekend is a tragedy,” but Democrats shouldn’t punish Americans with a shutdown and a “political stunt.”

Democrats say they won’t back down.

“It is truly a moral moment,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. “I think we need to take a stand.”

Fire victims and firefighters clash over Gov. Newsom’s push to limit investor-owned utility payouts

Click here for updates on this story    SACRAMENTO, California (KCRA) -- Gov. Gavin Newsom's push to limit how much private utility companies pay for causing devastating wildfires is fueling debate between wildfire victims and firefighters as California’s legislative session approaches its final days.The proposal, which critics have called a "bailout" for PG&E, SDG&E, and Southern California Edison, has yet to be put in writing. Newsom’s administration argues that the current wildfire liability system is flawed, warning of potential utility bankruptcies and the depletion of the state’s wildfire liability fund.Los Angeles-area wildfire victims traveled to Sacramento to voice their opposition to the plan. The group peacefully demonstrated outside of the governor's mansion as Newsom hosted a reception for state lawmakers Monday night. They also hosted a press conference on the situation Tuesday morning.The group expressed concerns about Newsom’s proposal to limit how much utilities pay victims, attorneys, and insurance companies if they cause a fire in the future."Governor Newsom's team keeps telling us, 'everybody stand down, this doesn't impact you!'" said Joy Chen, leader of the group Every Wildfire Survivor Network, in an interview with KCRA 3. "Today we are the victims, tomorrow, any Californian could be of a system that continues to enable three companies to keep burning down communities."Newsom's administration has defended the proposal, saying the current system slows down payments to victims due to disputes between utilities, insurance companies, trial attorneys, and hedge funds."Here’s my response to those who don’t want change: it’s untenable. Status quo is not going to work. It’s not going to work for victims," Newsom said at an unrelated press conference in the Bay Area last week.The California Professional Firefighters union announced its support for the plan this week, citing changes made by the governor to address how the proposal could impact local governments. The initial version of the governor's proposal would have severely limited how much local governments get to rebuild when their property is destroyed. Those changes to the proposal have not yet been made public.In a letter to Newsom, the union wrote, "The stability of the state's utilities, insurance plans, and recovery funds must all be balanced with ensuring that wildfire victims and impacted communities are able to recover and rebuild."The firefighters' union did not respond to requests for an interview before the publication deadline. None of the investor-owned utility companies have commented on the proposal.Former Democratic Assemblyman Chris Holden, who helped create California’s current wildfire liability system in 2019 after PG&E caused the Camp Fire, expressed concerns about the timing of the proposed changes."We really shouldn’t be here," Holden told KCRA 3 in an interview."What is untenable is that the utilities continue to find themselves starting fires and burning down communities, they need to be held accountable for them," he said.When asked if the system needs change, Holden added, "I think there’s always [a] need to look at it and make it stronger. To do it at the 11th hour at the end of session is not the time."Sources close to the situation Tuesday afternoon said Democrats in the California Senate have introduced a counterproposal. Unlike Newsom’s plan, the Senate’s proposal would allow insurance companies to continue suing investor-owned utility companies to recoup their losses.Other elements of the Senate's plan include limiting utility companies' return on investment for wildfire maintenance and pushing the California Public Utilities Commission to cap future utility rate increases at the rate of inflation.California's legislative session ends Aug. 31st. Because state law requires a 72-hour public review period for proposed state laws, lawmakers and the governor have until Friday to put a negotiated plan into legislation.Please note: This story was provided to CNN Wire by an affiliate and does not contain original CNN reporting. This content carries a strict local market embargo. If you share the same market as the contributor of this article, you may not use it on any platform.
Read Next Story