How are Democrats trying to reform ICE?
Democratic leadership has put forth several demands for the agency
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
While Democrats and Republicans are working to come to an agreement on funding Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the two sides remain far apart. Despite Republicans controlling Congress, they are unable to pass funding for ICE without some Democratic votes. Democrats in both chambers of Congress have thus put forth a series of changes they want to see within the controversial agency, whose funding expires Feb. 13.
What did the commentators say?
Democrats are calling for several major shifts within ICE, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) has said these changes are a “line in the sand.” The most impactful proposal regards warrants. Democrats are “seeking to bar federal immigration agents from entering private property without a judicial warrant,” said The Washington Post. ICE has previously advised its agents that they can “enter homes to make arrests without a warrant from a judge, outraging Democrats” who say this violates the Fourth Amendment.
Americans largely agree with this idea, polls show. Nearly 70% of Americans believe ICE must “have judicial warrants in order to forcibly enter homes of people subject to deportation,” according to an Economist/YouGov poll. Despite the backing of most of the public, some in the GOP have “balked, arguing that the proposal would add an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy,” said the Post.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
The widespread use of face coverings by ICE has also come under scrutiny, and Democrats are “pushing for a mask ban and identification requirements for federal agents,” said The Hill. ICE officials say that wearing masks prevents their agents from being doxxed online, but Democrats “argue that officers’ practice of masking and not displaying ID badges erodes accountability in these operations.” Republicans, including House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), have “indicated changes to a mask and ID policy amount to nearly a nonstarter.”
There are several other changes that Democrats are seeking. They include prohibiting federal funds from “being used to conduct enforcement near sensitive locations, including medical facilities, schools, childcare facilities” and places of worship, said The Guardian. Democrats also want to stop ICE from “conducting stops, questioning and searches based on an individual’s presence at certain locations, their job, their spoken language and accent, or their race or ethnicity.” This last measure follows one notable video that circulated of an ICE agent claiming he was detaining a man “because of your accent.”
And while ICE has recently said it will equip all of its agents with body cameras, this has Democrats “running headlong into a new problem: fear that the technology will provide another avenue for mass surveillance of protesters,” said Politico. Though Democrats have made these body cameras one of their foremost demands, they must also navigate a growing “outcry from privacy advocates that surveillance tools will allow ICE agents to identify and track protesters.”
What next?
Democrats and Republicans are continuing to negotiate over the various ICE demands, and Democrats rejected an offer from the White House. But “finding real agreement in such a short time will be difficult,” said The Associated Press, with Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) saying it will likely be “an impossibility.” And House GOP leadership is also “demanding that some of their own priorities be added to the Homeland Security spending bill,” including a provision that would require proof of citizenship before people register to vote.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Justin Klawans has worked as a staff writer at The Week since 2022. He began his career covering local news before joining Newsweek as a breaking news reporter, where he wrote about politics, national and global affairs, business, crime, sports, film, television and other news. Justin has also freelanced for outlets including Collider and United Press International.
-
Elon Musk’s pivot from Mars to the moonIn the Spotlight SpaceX shifts focus with IPO approaching
-
‘Hong Kong is stable because it has been muzzled’Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Magazine solutions - February 20, 2026Puzzle and Quizzes Magazine solutions - February 20, 2026
-
‘Hong Kong is stable because it has been muzzled’Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Judge rejects California’s ICE mask ban, OKs ID lawSpeed Read Federal law enforcement agents can wear masks but must display clear identification
-
Democrats push for ICE accountabilityFeature U.S. citizens shot and violently detained by immigration agents testify at Capitol Hill hearing
-
Minnesota’s legal system buckles under Trump’s ICE surgeIN THE SPOTLIGHT Mass arrests and chaotic administration have pushed Twin Cities courts to the brink as lawyers and judges alike struggle to keep pace with ICE’s activity
-
Big-time money squabbles: the conflict over California’s proposed billionaire taxTalking Points Californians worth more than $1.1 billion would pay a one-time 5% tax
-
Trump links funding to name on Penn StationSpeed Read Trump “can restart the funding with a snap of his fingers,” a Schumer insider said
-
Trump reclassifies 50,000 federal jobs to ease firingsSpeed Read The rule strips longstanding job protections from federal workers
-
Supreme Court upholds California gerrymanderSpeed Read The emergency docket order had no dissents from the court
