Lead: On Feb. 17, 2026, Senate Democrats delivered a counterproposal to Republicans and the White House seeking changes to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) lapsed. The move follows two fatal officer-involved shootings during a recent immigration operation in Minneapolis and Democrats’ vow to withhold full DHS funding without specific enforcement reforms. Lawmakers remain on recess this week; negotiators exchanged drafts but did not reach agreement before a brief funding extension expired. Key operational impacts are uneven across DHS components, with some agencies already shielded by prior legislation while others face an immediate lapse in appropriations.
- Democrats submitted a formal counteroffer late Monday, Feb. 16–17, 2026; Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer confirmed the filing but said details were not immediately public.
- Funding for DHS lapsed on Saturday; ICE and CBP continue some operations using carryover provisions from last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, while TSA, Coast Guard and FEMA are affected by the lapse.
- Schumer outlined three headline reforms Democrats insist on: end roving patrols and restrict entries into certain locations, establish a use-of-force code for immigration agents, and prohibit masks while requiring body cameras.
- Some proposed measures, such as body cameras, have seen limited bipartisan interest, but mask bans and operational constraints have met strong Republican resistance citing officer safety concerns.
- President Trump said he would meet with Democrats this week about DHS funding but expressed opposition to some of their demands; White House border czar Tom Homan defended agents’ use of masks for safety reasons.
- Negotiators had a short-term funding extension that expired late last week; congressional leaders say members would be recalled if a deal is reached, otherwise lawmakers are not scheduled to return until Feb. 23.
Background
Appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security require regular congressional action; when funding lapses, agencies enter an uncertain operational and payroll state until lawmakers pass new appropriations. The current impasse began after a short-term extension aimed at buying negotiators time expired late last week, returning DHS to a funding lapse that took effect on Saturday. Democrats escalated their position after two deadly shootings by federal agents in Minneapolis during an immigration enforcement operation; those incidents sharpened calls from many Democrats for tighter oversight and operational rules governing ICE and CBP.
Republicans have generally emphasized the need to preserve robust border and immigration enforcement, arguing new limits could reduce officer effectiveness and increase risk. Some reform proposals — notably requiring body-worn cameras — have attracted tentative bipartisan interest, creating limited common ground. Other demands from Democrats, such as banning masks for federal immigration agents and curbing certain patrol tactics, have been more contentious, with critics citing officer safety and operational secrecy in high-risk contexts.
Main Event
On Monday, Feb. 17, Democrats formally transmitted a counteroffer to both the White House and House and Senate Republicans as part of ongoing DHS-funding negotiations. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer confirmed the submission and reiterated that Democrats would not support a funding bill that preserves the status quo for ICE and CBP in the wake of recent deadly uses of force. While the public text of the counteroffer was not immediately released, Schumer summarized three core objectives on television and in public remarks.
President Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that he planned to meet with Democrats this week to discuss the matter, but said he did not support several of their proposals, adding that his priority is to “protect law enforcement” and “protect ICE.” The White House has pushed back on restrictions it considers to undermine agents’ ability to respond to violence. White House border czar Tom Homan defended mask use by agents in a Sunday interview, citing increased assaults and threats against personnel.
Operationally, the lapse has uneven effects: ICE and CBP retain some capacity due to funds routed in last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, but components such as the Transportation Security Administration, the Coast Guard and FEMA are immediately affected. Most employees in affected agencies continue to work during a lapse but typically do not receive pay until Congress restores funding, raising short-term morale and logistical concerns for response and readiness.
Analysis & Implications
Politically, the DHS funding fight places Democrats in a higher-stakes posture: by conditioning funding on ICE and CBP reforms, they force Republicans to choose between preserving agency budgets and accepting operational constraints. That dynamic elevates the bargaining leverage of a smaller, cohesive caucus at a moment when public attention is high following the Minneapolis shootings. If Democrats hold firm, Republicans may face pressure to concede on select reforms — especially those with public safety optics like body cameras — while resisting measures they say would hamstring enforcement.
For DHS operations, the immediate consequence is uncertainty. Agencies dependent on annual appropriations face planning and procurement disruptions; FEMA and Coast Guard readiness for emergent missions could be degraded if the lapse extends. The practical effect may be a patchwork of functional continuity: agencies with alternative fund sources or reprogramming flexibility keep acting, while others trim nonessential activity and delay new contracts or hires.
On policy substance, the debate spotlights long-standing tensions about immigration enforcement oversight. Mandates around use-of-force standards, body cameras and restrictions on mask-wearing implicate legal, civil-liberties and operational concerns. Any negotiated package will need to balance transparency and accountability demands against operational security and officer safety arguments — a balance that has proven politically and technically difficult in prior reform efforts.
Comparison & Data
| Agency | Immediate effect from funding lapse | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| ICE | Operations continue in part | Some activity sustained by carryover/legislative provisions from last year’s omnibus |
| CBP | Operations continue in part | Border operations retain capacity but planning for new initiatives may pause |
| TSA | Impacted by lapse | Screening workforce continues to work but payroll and procurement affected |
| Coast Guard | Impacted by lapse | Maritime operations face funding uncertainty for new missions and maintenance |
| FEMA | Impacted by lapse | Disaster response readiness can be constrained if the lapse endures |
The table shows the uneven operational exposure across DHS components. Agencies with alternative or carryover funding sources can maintain core operations in the short term, while others face immediate budgetary disruptions that could slow procurement and nonessential services.
Reactions & Quotes
“These are common-sense proposals… It’s something that every police department does across the country, but ICE is rogue, out of control.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer
Schumer used public interviews to summarize Democrats’ core demands and tie them to public accountability goals after the Minneapolis shootings.
“We’re going to protect law enforcement. We’re going to protect ICE.”
President Donald J. Trump
The president signaled willingness to meet on the issue but framed the dispute around preserving enforcement capacity and officer safety.
“While I don’t like that agents wear masks, I believe they need to wear them to protect themselves”
Tom Homan, White House border czar
Homan articulated the administration’s safety-based rationale for resisting a universal ban on masks for immigration agents.
Unconfirmed
- Precise legislative language of the Democrats’ latest counteroffer has not been publicly released, so the scope and enforceability of proposed reforms remain unclear.
- It is not yet confirmed which specific ICE or CBP activities, if any, would be carved out or exempted under the counteroffer during the implementation period.
- The timeline for congressional recall and whether negotiators can finalize an agreement before Feb. 23, 2026, is uncertain and hinges on private talks between leaders.
Bottom Line
The February 17 filing marks a tactical escalation by Senate Democrats: tying DHS funding to operational reforms converts budget negotiations into a vehicle for policy change on immigration enforcement. How Republicans respond will determine whether the standoff ends in a narrow package with technical reforms (for example, body cameras) or a broader settlement that reshapes ICE and CBP practices.
Practically, the lapse already creates uneven effects across DHS components and adds stress to agencies that must plan missions without clear funding. Watch for two near-term inflection points: whether leaders can close a deal before lawmakers return on Feb. 23 and whether the White House and congressional Republicans accept limited accountability measures while preserving core enforcement authorities.