The power of the purse has always been Congress’s most formidable weapon, and now some Democrats are threatening to use it as a cudgel against the Department of Homeland Security.
Rep. Julia Johnson of Texas has called for curbing DHS funding while questioning Secretary Kristi Noem’s ability to manage her department’s budget. The brewing confrontation centers on the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by an immigration agent in Minneapolis, an incident that has galvanized the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.
Make no mistake about what is happening here. This represents a fundamental test of congressional authority versus executive action, the kind of constitutional showdown that has defined American governance since the founding. Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution could not be clearer: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.”
The left’s strategy is straightforward. After the U.S. strike in Venezuela, progressive voices demanded that funding be withheld from the Pentagon and State Department. Now, following the Minneapolis shooting, those same voices are calling for financial restrictions on DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas made an emotional appeal on the House floor, fighting back tears as she spoke. “A child has lost her mom. And y’all want to pretend that it is OK,” she said. “I am asking if there is anyone that will stand for the very people that elected us and sent us to Congress?”
Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, the ranking Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee, has taken a more measured approach. He confirmed that Democrats have requested an oversight hearing from Chairman Andrew Garbarino of New York to examine ICE operations. “That’s a reasonable request,” Thompson said.
When pressed on whether Congress should leverage appropriations to force changes at ICE, Thompson demurred, saying such decisions were “above my pay grade.”
Not everyone shares Thompson’s restraint. Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, advocates for a more aggressive stance. “We should use every means at our disposal to do it,” Raskin stated plainly. “Including the appropriations process.”
The appropriations process offers Congress multiple tools. Lawmakers can cut funding outright, impose spending limitations, insert language prohibiting specific activities, or direct agencies to perform their duties in prescribed ways. Some progressives are pushing for the most extreme option: slashing ICE’s budget entirely, even if it means forcing a government shutdown.
The next funding deadline arrives at 11:59 p.m. Eastern time on January 30. Whether Democrats will actually follow through on their threats remains uncertain, but the rhetoric suggests a significant faction is prepared to fight.
This situation underscores a larger truth about American politics. When emotions run high and tragedy strikes, the temptation to use every available lever of power becomes nearly irresistible. The question is whether cooler heads will prevail or whether we are headed for another budget standoff that could paralyze the federal government.
The American people have seen this movie before, and they know how it ends. Government shutdowns rarely produce the policy changes their advocates seek, but they always create chaos and uncertainty. Whether Democratic leadership can maintain party unity while avoiding that outcome will determine the next chapter of this unfolding drama.
Related: Oregon State Senator Tells Federal Immigration Agents to Leave as Gang Violence Rises
