Fetterman Makes Decision About Supporting ICE Funding
Pennsylvania Democratic Sen. John Fetterman signaled this week that he will not support efforts to block funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), distancing himself from members of his own party as Congress approaches a high-stakes spending vote with national security implications.
Fetterman made his position clear Monday, pushing back against mounting pressure from Pennsylvania Democrats in the U.S. House who want DHS funding conditioned on sweeping reforms aimed at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). All seven Democratic House members from the state sent a formal letter Tuesday urging Fetterman — along with Republican Sen. Dave McCormick — to oppose the current funding bill.
“We urge you to stand with us in opposing any DHS funding bill that does not include critical reforms,” the lawmakers said in the letter, delivered Tuesday, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer. “We look forward to working together to advance legislation that both keeps our nation secure and upholds our fundamental values.”
The effort was led by Rep. Chris Deluzio, a Democrat representing parts of Allegheny County in Western Pennsylvania. Deluzio has been floated in Democratic circles as a possible primary challenger to Fetterman in 2028 — a detail that adds political intrigue to the intraparty standoff.
“Deluzio was joined by Democratic U.S. Reps. Brendan Boyle and Dwight Evans, who represent Philadelphia, as well as U.S. Reps. Madeleine Dean, Mary Gay Scanlon, and Chrissy Houlahan, whose districts include the Philadelphia suburbs. U.S. Rep. Summer Lee, a progressive Democrat whose district includes Pittsburgh, also signed the letter,” the outlet reported.
Boyle, the most senior member of the group and another rumored future challenger to Fetterman, took an aggressive tone toward immigration enforcement, declaring: “ICE is currently operating like a lawless, out-of-control agency. We cannot send it another blank check.”
The House Democrats pressed the state’s senators to reject any legislation that funds DHS “without first securing meaningful, enforceable reforms to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and related DHS agency activity.”
Fetterman acknowledged disagreements with some ICE enforcement practices but rejected the strategy of using DHS funding as leverage, warning it could trigger a partial federal government shutdown. He said he opposes shutting down the government and remains open to negotiations on DHS appropriations, including the possibility of separating the bill from a broader spending package.
Despite criticizing ICE operations in Minneapolis and calling Tuesday for the removal of DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, Fetterman emphasized his refusal to allow a shutdown to occur.
“I will never vote to shut our government down, especially our Defense Department,” he said, noting that a partial shutdown would not eliminate ICE funding anyway. The agency, he pointed out, already received $178 billion through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — legislation he opposed.
“I reject the calls to defund or abolish ICE,” Fetterman said Monday. “I strongly disagree with many strategies and practices ICE deployed in Minneapolis, and believe that must change.”
He added that he wants “a conversation” about DHS funding and supports removing it from the larger spending package, though he admitted “it is unlikely that will happen.”
Sen. McCormick, meanwhile, reiterated his support for Border Patrol and ICE over the weekend, while also calling for “a full investigation into the tragedy in Minneapolis” that resulted in the death of armed protester Alex Pretti.
The divide highlights growing fractures within the Democratic Party as President Donald J. Trump’s administration continues to prioritize border enforcement, national sovereignty, and law-and-order policies during his second term. While progressive Democrats push to constrain ICE’s authority, others appear wary of the political and security consequences of defunding core federal agencies.
With key funding deadlines approaching, the Senate is expected to vote this week as lawmakers attempt to resolve the impasse.
“We voted against this bill last week and ask that you do the same,” the lawmakers wrote. “Funding without adequate reform risks endorsing current approaches that undermine public safety and due process, erode American liberties, and weaken public trust.”