With just 10 days to negotiate, a DHS shutdown appears inevitable

Congress has 10 days to prevent another shutdown — this one exclusively affecting the Department of Homeland Security. There’s not much optimism about a deal.

At issue is one of the thorniest issues in national politics — federal immigration enforcement, including new guardrails for agencies and repercussions for the local jurisdictions that refuse to cooperate with them.

Already, Republicans are rejecting central demands from Democrats, including tightening warrant requirements and banning federal agents from wearing masks. Democrats are pouring cold water on a GOP push to target so-called “sanctuary cities.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune warned Tuesday that getting an agreement to President Donald Trump’s desk by the new Feb. 13 deadline is an “impossibility.”

“We’ve got a very short timeframe in which to do this, which I argued against,” he said, referring to his opposition to the two-week DHS punt Democrats insisted on.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, meanwhile, said Tuesday that another short-term patch was “off the table” for Democrats.

Together those comments portend a potentially lengthy shutdown that would disproportionately impact the DHS functions that don’t involve immigration enforcement, including TSA, FEMA and the Coast Guard. That’s because agencies like ICE and Border Patrol that have been at the center of the Democratic uproar received funding through the domestic policy megabill Republicans enacted in July.

That reality had a critical mass of Senate Democrats ready to swallow full-year DHS funding last month that held agency budgets flat and passed the House with only seven Democratic votes. But that plan evaporated on Jan. 24, when DHS agents killed 37-year-old Alex Pretti on the streets of Minneapolis and sparked bipartisan calls for new strictures on the Trump administration.

Thune and other Republicans are already warning that they believe they will need to buy more time after the Feb. 13 deadline. Negotiations over an immigration enforcement deal have largely been on hold, according to several senators, as the House wrestled with the larger spending package that finally passed Tuesday.

So far, Republicans and Democrats can’t even agree on who will be doing the negotiating. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is putting the onus on Thune. But Thune and other Republicans believe any viable deal will need to be negotiated primarily by the White House while keeping congressional Republicans “engaged.”

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) said Tuesday that a deal would be difficult “without Trump deciding to drag Republicans in a direction that is normally uncomfortable for them.”

“But that's different from John Thune just declaring that he's out,” he added. “The majority leader can't take himself out of the negotiation."

A lengthy DHS shutdown could be uncomfortable quickly for both parties. While ICE and Customs and Border Protection would largely have a free hand to continue immigration enforcement, the Coast Guard and TSA would lose their appropriations — potentially snarling airports and threatening paychecks for an entire military branch. The Secret Service and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency would also be affected.

Plenty of members are skeptical there will be a deal at all, given Congress’ perennial struggle to reach an agreement on anything even tangentially related to immigration.

“I have to say that I’m a little skeptical of this entire enterprise,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said. “I’m a little skeptical of the entire project here of trying to lard up an appropriations bill that funds critical agencies with a whole bunch of statutory restrictions.”

Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.) said of the incipient negotiation, “I can't say it feels like good faith.”

Democrats have outlined several key demands for any negotiations and are expected to formally present a proposal “very shortly,” according to Schumer.

But while Republicans have expressed openness to some of the Democratic proposals, such as body cameras and deescalation training, there is broad opposition to requiring immigration officers to obtain judicial warrants instead of administrative warrants before seeking apprehensions. Many, including Speaker Mike Johnson, also oppose requiring federal agents to remove masks, arguing it would be a possible safety threat.

“I can tell you that we are never going to go along with adding an entirely new layer of judicial warrants,” Johnson said Tuesday. “It is unimplementable. It cannot be done, and it should not be done. It's not necessary.”

Republicans, meanwhile, are pushing for language cracking down on “sanctuary cities” that don’t comply with ICE and CBP to be included in any agreement that includes new restrictions on those agencies. Other Republicans are mulling trying to attach bigger immigration provisions, including increasing penalties for immigrants who cross the border illegally or re-enter the country illegally.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) used an Oval Office bill signing with Trump Tuesday to make his pitch for a sanctuary cities crackdown as part of any negotiation to extend DHS funding.

“If you want a debate on how to solve this problem, show up next week,” he said.

Trump encouraged the push: “I hope you’re going to press that very hard,” he told Graham.

But the policies Graham and other Republicans are proposing — such as imposing criminal penalties on state and local officials who “willfully interfere” with immigration enforcement — have long been a nonstarter for Democrats.

Sen. Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Senate Democrat, said it already would be “difficult” to get his caucus to support another funding punt, noting that roughly half of his Democratic colleagues already voted against the last spending package.

And trying to link sanctuary cities to the debate over immigration enforcement tactics, Durbin added, is “not realistic.”

“There's so many different versions of sanctuary law in these communities and states,” he said. “What we're talking about is funding this agency, but making sure there are reforms before funding.”

Other Senate Democrats who voted for the spending deal last week — including Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee — are already warning that Republicans shouldn’t count on their votes again for another punt.

Another senior Democratic appropriator, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, said she believed there was enough time to get a deal if negotiators were “committed.”

“But it would help if they start negotiating,” Shaheen said.