Legislative Session
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will resume consideration of H.J. Res. 142, which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The President pro tempore.
Mr. President, before I remind people that this day is Abraham Lincoln's birthday and talk about Lincoln, I want to start this morning by saying that my wife Barbara and this Senator are praying for those involved in the bus crash from Iowa Lakes Community College. Just yesterday, in Calhoun County on Highway 4, a bus rolled several times leaving 1 dead and 32 injured.
These young people were traveling to a baseball tournament when tragedy struck. We are praying for the family who lost a loved one. To the passengers and their families, we are praying for you and for full recovery from your injuries.
I am thankful for the Iowans on hand to help, including emergency personnel, healthcare providers, and the Iowa Lakes Community College community for supporting the team through this difficult time.
Mr. President, as we celebrate the 250th birthday of this great America and our independence from Great Britain, I want to recognize the birth of our Nation's 16th President on this very day, February 12, 217 years ago.
Americans know that President Lincoln was instrumental in preserving the United States and abolishing slavery. He also championed a law to fight fraud. That is my intention today.
In 1863, President Lincoln signed the False Claims Act. ``Lincoln's Law,'' as it is referred to, helped expose fraudsters at that time selling inferior supplies at premium prices to the Union Army during the Civil War.
So how did this law work? It gave patriots a financial incentive to blow the whistle on wrongdoing, rewarding them with a share of the fines collected through litigation.
Now, what happened to Lincoln's Law during World War II, and for reasons I don't know, but I have a suspicion that maybe Congress, at that time, felt that reporting this stuff may hurt our defense efforts to win World War II or for whatever reason, they neutered the legislation.
Then, four decades ago, I strengthened Lincoln's Law. I wrote the 1986 amendments to Lincoln's Law that restored this commonsense tool to fight fraud. By empowering patriotic whistleblowers to reveal wrongdoing, the law continues to deliver for the American people, returning approximately $85 billion for taxpayers since my amendments were adopted 40 years ago.
And that is not all. There is a deterrent effect of the legislation. My amendments to the False Claims Act have saved even more taxpayers' dollars by deterring untold billions of dollars of fraud in the first place.
In the last fiscal year, the Federal Government recovered over $6.8 billion dollars in fraudulent payments. This is the largest single-year recovery in the history of the False Claims Act. As we observe President Lincoln's birthday on February 12, I also want to remind Americans to celebrate the patriotic
You can be sure that I will keep championing the False Claims Act to protect truth-tellers from retaliation when they stick their necks out to blow the whistle on waste, fraud, and abuse.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The majority leader is recognized.
Mr. President, Homeland Security appropriations expire tomorrow, and there are concerning signs the Democrats are prepared to walk away from the table and allow funding for critical Homeland Security Agencies to expire--funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the TSA, the Coast Guard, cyber security, and more.
I want to take just a moment to review how we got here because it was a mere 3 weeks ago we had a bipartisan agreement on the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill--bipartisan. Both House and Senate Democrats had signed off. That bipartisan agreement included additional funding for body cameras for Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. It included funding for deescalation training for ICE, and it included additional oversight of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol spending. We were all set to pass this bill, and then Democrats reneged on the agreement.
And so here we are. Circumstances changed. I understand that. But some Democrats were already signaling they were prepared to walk away from the deal before the most recent events in Minneapolis even transpired.
So Democrats wanted to reopen negotiations. Despite our bipartisan agreement, Republicans agreed to their request for additional time to consider this bill before final passage. Democrats wanted 2 weeks. Republicans warned--I warned at the time--that more time would be needed, that it would be almost impossible to come to an agreement and pass a renegotiated bill in that timeframe. But Democrats insisted. And to prevent them from shutting down a large portion of the Federal Government, Republicans agreed to their request.
Unfortunately, once they got their 2-week agreement, Democrats showed little urgency when it came to negotiations. It took them more than a week to come up with a list of demands. They didn't provide legislative text until this past weekend. But now, they have the gall to suggest that it is Republicans who are slow-walking things.
The White House responded to Democrats' list of demands within 2 days and sent proposed legislative text over yesterday, and it is an extremely serious offer.
On top of that, the White House has continued to show it is committed to taking actions on its own, with Tom Homan, this morning, announcing the withdrawal of almost all agents from Minnesota.
It is clear that the White House is serious, but it is increasingly looking like Democrats are not.
Now, I am not sure if Democrats thought the White House would just accede to every one of their demands or what, but they cannot reasonably expect to reach an agreement without actual negotiation with give and take from both sides. We warned Democrats they were not allowing enough time for this process, but they insisted on their 2- week timeframe CR anyway.
And now that we have been proven right, the onus is on Democrats to agree to an additional CR to allow time to complete the negotiations-- unless, of course, Democrats are more interested in a political issue than they are an actual outcome because it is starting to look like Democrats might not have been interested in actual reforms. As I mentioned, they left an agreement on the table that would have provided for body cameras, deescalation training, and increased spending oversight. And now, instead of allowing adequate time to negotiate on additional measures, they are threatening to shut down the Department of Homeland Security, which will get them exactly zero changes to the status quo.
So what is it? What is it that the Democrats want? Policy changes? Or is it a political issue?
Democrats are never going to get their full wish list. That is not the way this works. Republicans, for example, will not agree to measures that make it impossible for law enforcement officers to do their jobs. But Democrats can build on the measures the Republicans have already agreed to if they actually engage in serious negotiations with the White House.
So the ball is in the Democrats' court. Are they going to shut down the Department of Homeland Security, which will be their second shutdown this fiscal year, or are they going to allow for the time to negotiate with the White House and get an agreement on a final bill?
That is the question before the House. We had a bill negotiated carefully that Democrats had signed off on which, as I said, they reneged on, wanted to revisit it, more time to negotiate, which we agreed to. We suggested at the time probably 4 to 6 weeks would be an adequate amount of time in which to negotiate the changes--or some of the changes, the reforms, other things on top of the ones that have already been the bill that they want.
And they said: 2 weeks. They used over a week of that, about 10 days, to actually come up with their list of demands, to which the White House responded quickly. And, again, right now, sitting in front of them, a counterproposal from the White House, a reasonable good faith offer, as I said.
So the question, again, before the House is: Are they serious, or aren't they? Is this about politics, or is it about solutions?
I would like to believe that we are actually here to try to solve this problem and to fund the government, not just the Department of Homeland Security, but all the Agencies of government that are covered in that bill, to include the Federal Emergency Management Agency, TSA, Coast Guard, cyber security. Those are all parts of this. It is pretty important stuff, I would argue.
Democrats are going to have an opportunity later today to vote not only on the bill as passed by the House, which they negotiated and then walked away from, which funds all these things I just mentioned. We will have that vote.
And they will also have an opportunity to allow for an extension for additional time, time which we all knew was going to be necessary to actually reach a final deal. So it really is in their court. And it is not something that they can point fingers at the Republicans or the White House. These are all things we have accommodated them literally in every way in an attempt to try and reach an agreement that would-- having been in good faith offered by the White House to work with them to reach a deal that would satisfy some, if not all, but certainly address some of their concerns and demands and do it in a way that keeps the government funded and keeps these important Agencies operating. That is the question, and it is really up to them. So we will find out, I guess, later today the answer to that question.
But I would simply say that we will be voting to keep the Federal Government funded, to keep it open, to keep these important Agencies-- so critical to the functioning of our Federal Government and the employees who work there who shouldn't be held hostage in a government shutdown--we will be voting today to keep all of those open, with reforms--with reforms--to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the very thing the Democrats have said they wanted, then walked away from and now are insisting that all the concessions that have been made by the White House to date aren't adequate, and yet they aren't willing to extend the time to continue the negotiations.
It is really kind of an ironic position to be in, but they seem to have embraced it. So we will have the votes.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader is recognized.
Mr. President, Americans are crystal clear about how they feel about ICE. The status quo cannot continue. We hear it from people back home and all over the country. People are angry. They are afraid. They want accountability and an end to the chaos. The White House and congressional Republicans must listen and deliver.
Democrats have been very clear: We will not support an extension of the status quo, a status quo that permits masked secret police to barge into people's homes without warrants, with no guardrails, with zero oversight from independent authorities, a rogue police force that doesn't obey the rules that every local police force and sheriff's office must obey. It is out of control. No American, regardless of party, supports having their taxpayer dollars fund a secret police force that operates without transparency or accountability. Democrats agree: We demand commonsense solutions, practical solutions--solutions that every police department in America abides by--to rein in ICE and stop the violence.
Now, today, Tom Homan held another press conference in Minneapolis, claiming that the surge in that city is going to soon conclude. He says a significant drawdown has been underway. But let me be very clear: Regardless of what Tom Homan says, ICE's abuses cannot be solved merely through Executive fiat alone. We, first and foremost, need legislation, and that is what Democrats have said from the start. We need legislation to rein in ICE and to end the violence. Without legislation, what Tom Homan says today could be reversed tomorrow on a whim from Donald Trump.
He could say: Go into that city. Put your masks back on.
``You don't need a warrant,'' Trump could tell them. Without legislation, Donald Trump could choose to put a rogue force in any city they want and have them operate without any guardrails.
So, again, Democrats have been clear. We need legislation to truly halt ICE's abuses. We need legislation to rein in ICE and stop the violence. Otherwise, this administration could go right back to what they were doing.
After weeks and weeks of the American people watching the horrors in Minneapolis, the administration felt the heat. So now they are claiming they are pulling ICE out of that city, but the administration doesn't actually want to reform ICE. They will never do it on their own. That is why we are fighting for legislation to rein in ICE and stop the violence.
And, look, there is no reason why Republicans should reject what Democrats in the Senate and the House are proposing. We simply want ICE to be required to follow the same standards that law enforcement agencies across the country already follow and, effectively, obey. We need legislation on warrants. We need legislation on codes of conduct. We need legislation to stop secret, unidentified police. Masks off, cameras on, and basic identification is a must. All of this happens in every other police department--just about every police department in the whole country.
So why do the Republicans resist? Because ICE was created as a rogue force to terrorize people, and the American people really don't like that.
Republicans should ask people back home: Do they think it is OK for Federal agents to wear masks and run around our neighborhoods without any identity as to who they are? Do they think it is OK for ICE to tail schoolbuses and use kids as bait to arrest their parents?
Of course, Americans don't think this is OK. It is simply not law enforcement.
And I want to make something else very clear: A lot of attention has been focused on Minneapolis--rightfully so--but ICE's abuses are happening all over the country, including in my city of New York.
A few months back, there was an outrageous, violent raid on Canal Street, where ICE swept vendors and residents, indiscriminately, asking random people on the street to show their papers and detaining people in droves, including U.S. citizens. ICE agents in New York are patrolling around subway stations. A video recently circulated of ICE agents seemingly barging into someone's home in Queens--without warrants. They are lurking around courthouses, waiting to arrest people who show up for legally mandated hearings.
I heard a heart-wrenching story of a young man in Port Chester who was on his way to church when he got pulled over. At the station, he was about to be released when two Federal agents showed up, asked to see his papers, lied to his wife. What started out as a Sunday drive to church ended up as a trip to a detention center in Louisiana-- sickening. That doesn't make America any safer. That only destroys the trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve.
So enough is enough. Enough is enough. Democrats will keep pushing the administration and our Republican colleagues to rein in ICE and stop the violence through a smart, commonsense, practical legislative proposal. We must get it done, and we are waiting for Republicans to join us.
Mr. President, now, on what happened in the last 2 days on indictments, we gaveled into session 2 days after learning Donald Trump's Justice Department tried and failed to push criminal charges-- meritless criminal charges--against two Members of this body and four Members of the House of Representatives. The President of the United States tried to throw two U.S. Senators in jail--Senators of the opposite party--simply because Trump didn't like what they said.
It is good these indictments failed. The grand jury--average citizens--in a rare moment, saw through these attacks on free speech and rejected what the prosecutors asked them to do, but the mere fact that these indictments were attempted should terrify every one of us. That is what happens in a dictatorship. The Chief Executive arrests people who speak out against him--legislators who speak out against him. It should not, cannot, must not happen here in America. Unfortunately, we all know Donald Trump will keep trying.
A lot of Members on this side of the aisle came to the floor yesterday as angry as I have ever seen them, and they were right to be angry, but both sides of the aisle should be angry. This is an attack on America. This is an attack on democracy. This is an attack on the legislative branch. This is an attack on free speech. If this happened to one of our Republican colleagues, they would want us to speak out, and they would be right because when a President tries to jail Senators for speaking their minds just because he disagrees with them, that is not a Democrat or a Republican problem; it is a constitutional crisis of the highest order. It is an assault on everyone who cares about free speech, who cares about basic freedoms, who cares about how our democracy has functioned for close to 250 years.
Look, this isn't just about six Members of Congress being indicted for one video; this is about Donald Trump destroying our democracy-- destroying our democracy--from top to bottom. His goons are arresting journalists and peaceful protesters. Masked agents are patrolling the streets of Minneapolis, launching raids in New York, shooting citizens in the streets. He is raiding election offices in Georgia and demanding the States turn over the voter rolls. He says there is fraud but has no evidence of it. It is a political heavy hand crushing our democracy.
Enough is enough. The American people are tired of this chaos. They are tired of corruption. They are tired of being lied to by this President.
When he asks himself why he is so unpopular, it is not Democrats attacking him, and it is not the press going after him. It is what he does.
The American people, Donald Trump, do not like what you are doing. They do not like what you are doing on costs. They do not like what you are doing on chaos. They do not like what you are doing on corruption.
If Republicans and Democrats don't take a stand in this Chamber, the lawlessness--the chaotic lawlessness--we have seen so far is not going to end. It is going to get worse and swallow all of us up.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority whip.
Mr. President, I come to the floor having heard the minority leader come to the floor, and
Yesterday, the Democrats received the legislative text that they demanded. Just this morning, border czar Tom Homan announced that the immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota was over. There has been significant progress in the last 2 weeks, enough progress that Democrats should join Republicans today to keep the Department of Homeland Security fully funded. Democrats don't seem to be determined, in any way, to fund the Department of Homeland Security. They seem determined, however, to protect illegal immigrant criminals.
The goal of the Democrat Party, as stated, is to abolish ICE-- Immigration and Customs Enforcement--and to defund American security. Remember, the Democrats are the party of ``defund the police.'' They are not for the safety and the security of the American people, and a ``no'' vote today will confirm that.
Who pays the price? Well, the American people because FEMA will not be funded, TSA will not be funded, the Coast Guard, the Secret Service, America's cyber security defense--all defunded because Democrats are prioritizing illegal immigrant criminals ahead of the safety of the American people.
The White House and Republicans are acting in good faith. Democrats should vote today to keep the Department of Homeland Security open.
The first duty of our government is to keep Americans safe. Today, the U.S. Senate faces a test. Republicans are going to answer that test by upholding our duty to the American people. The question is, Are the Democrats going to join us? It sounds, from listening to the minority leader, that they have no intention of voting to keep America safe and secure. Democrats seem to be determined, as announced by the minority leader, to block the funding for the Department of Homeland Security.
Mr. President, we Republicans have acted repeatedly to secure the border, to strengthen law enforcement, to remove illegal immigrant criminals from our midst and from our neighborhoods and from our communities. From the Laken Riley Act to the current funding bill, we have worked in good faith with the Democrats to make America safer. Now what we see are Democrats flip-flopping on funding the government.
This was a bipartisan bill. Democrats helped negotiate it. The Democrat ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, who is on the floor right now, supported it. Democrats in the House voted for it.
Republicans have offered Senate Democrats fair terms for reasonable reforms. Senate Democrats are now rejecting them.
Over the course of the past 2 weeks, the Democrats' list of unreasonable demands continues to balloon. Democrats are now demanding an end to Supreme Court-approved administrative warrants. The Supreme Court says they are good; the Democrats say: No, not good enough.
Democrats are now demanding harsh restrictions on cooperation between Federal immigration officers and State and local officials.
Democrats are now demanding a ban on immigration enforcement at so- called sensitive locations. You know, they have been hospitals in the past, schools, places of worship. Not enough--not for the Democrats. No, their demands are so extreme they are now defining ``sensitive locations''--expanding it to include, of all places, polling places. Illegal immigrants should not be at polling places and certainly not illegal immigrant criminals. Now the Democrats want to add this to their list of sensitive locations. Even Joe Biden's Homeland Security Secretary said that was a step too far.
Taken together, these conditions would materially slow immigration enforcement in this Nation. Polling locations would become a sanctuary location for illegal immigrant criminals--people allowed to roam free in our communities.
Democrats want to turn America into a sanctuary country. They have been for abolishing borders.
Republicans believe many of the Democrat demands would undermine public safety and the rule of law. And you know what. So do the American people. They agree with us.
We are not going to make and accept proposals from the Democrats that are going to make our communities less safe.
So what comes next if the Democrats reject the offer that is before them today or reject a continuing resolution to discuss and continue to work together? It is entirely up to the Democrats. If the Department of Homeland Security is defunded, the pain will extend throughout the country. And Democrats know what the Department of Homeland Security does. It funds disaster relief through the Federal Emergency Management Agency. It keeps America safe when we fly by going through TSA. It protects our Nation from cyber attacks through the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency. It oversees the Coast Guard.
The Vice Commandant of the Coast Guard testified to Congress this week. They asked about this, about the devastating impact of the loss of funding. He had some things to say about that. He said 56,000 Active members of the Coast Guard would work without pay. He said morale would plunge, and the Coast Guard recruitment efforts would suffer.
The record is clear: Republicans have acted to protect the American people. Ninety-six percent of the government is already funded today because of our work passing 11 of the 12 appropriations bills, and we are down to the final 1--the last 4 percent of funding. We are ready to do it again.
Democrats have two options: One, vote today to fund the Department of Homeland Security, or two, stand side by side with illegal immigrant criminals. That is the choice. What is it going to be?
If they refuse to fund our Nation's security, they will be making a deliberate choice and a deliberate statement that they are wanting to practice the politics of pain, and the American people will regrettably be the ones paying the price for the destructive demands of the radical left that is running their party today.
Mr. President, on a separate matter, yesterday, I was at the White House with the President of the United States. President Trump and his all-star energy team have done historic work to unleash American energy, and that most certainly includes Wyoming coal.
Recently, the east coast experienced something that Wyoming experiences every year, as does your home State of Montana, Mr. President, and that is sustained temperatures below freezing.
The power grid was tested, and through it all, coal delivered. Coal generation jumped 31 percent during the recent winter storm. Meanwhile, wind and solar energy declined. Coal literally saved American lives.
Coal is also saving American families money. According to a recent report, families saved more than $100 on their energy bills last year thanks to coal generation.
Coal is one of the most affordable, available, reliable, secure sources of energy in the world. We have it right here. We have more coal in the United States than any other country, and my home State of Wyoming produces nearly half of it. For America to be energy dominant, we need Wyoming coal.
For years, the Biden administration tried to shut down coal mines, coal-fired powerplants, and attack American coal miners. That was the Biden administration.
I will never forget when I heard Joe Biden tell his EPA Administrator to prioritize climate over energy that was affordable, available, and reliable. That is what they did. The American people paid a heavy price.
What a difference a new administration has made because today, America is no longer apologizing to others for using our God-given energy resources.
President Trump's announcement this week builds on the work that Republicans have done over the past year. Our shared agenda is unleashing American energy, it is growing the economy, and it is putting money back in people's pockets.
Our Working Families Tax Cut law opened up more Federal land for new coal leasing. The Department of the Interior has already acted on this. It has opened 11 million new acres to leasing.
Additionally, the Working Families Tax Cut law reduced royalty rates for
At the same time, Republicans delivered no taxes on overtime for American workers. Well, that includes a lot of Wyoming coal miners and coal miners in your home State of Montana as well, Mr. President. They have earned every dollar they make; and when they file their taxes this year, they will be able to keep more of it.
Wyoming families are thrilled with these changes. They know that coal funds our schools and services in our communities. And thanks to President Trump and Republicans, Wyoming coal miners are powering the Nation with affordable, available, reliable coal.
Mr. President, there is a book that I speak about when I talk to students and others in Wyoming, and it is called ``Hidden America: From Coal Miners to Cowboys, an Extraordinary Exploration of the Unseen People Who Make This Country Work.'' These are the men and women who put food on the table and keep our country with the energy that we need. It is a privilege for me, Mr. President--and I am sure for you in your home State--to represent these fine American workers.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to complete my remarks before the vote is called.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. President, I rise today to read my resolution congratulating the Seattle Seahawks for winning Super Bowl LX.
Whereas, on February 8, 2026, the Seattle Seahawks defeated the New England Patriots by a score of 29 to 13 to win Super Bowl LX in Santa Clara, CA;
Whereas the game marked the second Super Bowl victory and fourth Super Bowl appearance for the Seahawks;
Whereas the Seahawks finished 14 to 3 in the regular season, coming first in the National Football Conference--Western Division on their way to victories over the San Francisco 49ers in the NFC Divisional Round and the Los Angeles Rams in the NFC Championship Game;
Whereas the Seahawks opened up a lead in the first quarter of Super Bowl LX, which the Seahawks never relinquished throughout the game;
Whereas running back Kenneth Walker III dominated the defense of the Patriots, running 94 yards over 14 plays in the first half alone and becoming the first running back to win the honor of being named the Super Bowl Most Valuable Player in almost 30 years;
Whereas the unmatched ``Dark Side'' defense by the Seahawks held the Patriots scoreless through the first half of the game and forced punts on eight of the first nine possessions of the Patriots;
Whereas kicker Jason Myers scored 5 field goals, setting a new record for the most field goals in a Super Bowl and becoming the first player at any position to score more than 200 points over an entire season in the history of the National Football League--establishing a new record of 206 points as part of a strong special teams performance;
Whereas quarterback Sam Darnold capped a strong first season with the Seahawks with a 16-yard pass to AJ Barner to score the first touchdown of the game;
Whereas quarterback Devon Witherspoon hit the quarterback of the Patriots, Drake Maye, in the fourth quarter and forced an interception by linebacker Uchenna Nwosu, who carried the ball 45 yards to a touchdown;
Whereas the remarkable season of wide receiver Jaxon Smith-Njigba made him a unanimous All-Pro selection and the second Seahawk ever to win AP NFL Offensive Player of the Year;
Whereas the second-year head coach of the Seahawks, Mike Macdonald, led his team to victory, becoming the first head coach to win a Super Bowl as the primary defensive play caller and the third youngest head coach to win a Super Bowl;
Whereas the general manager of the Seahawks, John Schneider, who was named the NFL Executive of the Year for 2025, constructed a second Super Bowl-winning roster for the Seahawks, with entirely new players and a new head coach, becoming the first NFL executive to do so with the same organization;
Whereas the chair of the Seahawks, Jody Allen, played an important role in maintaining the winning culture established by previous owners while pushing the organization to develop innovative strategies;
Whereas the Seahawks became the first team in NFL history to win the Super Bowl and commit zero turnovers over the course of their full postseason;
Whereas every member of the Seahawks' roster contributed to their decisive victory in Super Bowl LX; and
Whereas the victory of the Seahawks would not have been possible without the support of our ``12s''--the greatest fans in the world;
Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Senate congratulates the Seattle Seahawks, their staff, and ``12s'' everywhere for the victory of the Seahawks in Super Bowl LX and respectfully directs the Secretary of the Senate to transmit an enrolled copy of this resolution to the chair of the Seattle Seahawks, Jody Allen; the president of the Seattle Seahawks, Chuck Arnold; the general manager of the Seattle Seahawks, John Schneider; and the head coach of the Seattle Seahawks, Mike Macdonald.
Mr. President, I have another topic I would like to turn to before the vote, and that is to say, what we have seen over the last many months is downright un-American: masked Federal agents trampling people's First, Second, and Fourth Amendment rights and more; breaking into people's cars; tear-gassing protesters; using children as bargaining chips; and, of course, killing American citizens in broad daylight.
It is clear to just about everyone in every part of this country that ICE and CBP are out of control and must be reined in. It is clear to everyone--that is, except maybe some Republicans here in Congress.
For years, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have warned of government overreach and rogue Federal Agencies trampling Americans' constitutional rights. They have gone to great lengths to speak out against government tyranny when we ask mega corporations not to pollute, and you can bet they will scream to the high heaven about injustice and government thugs when we ask billionaires to pay their fair share in taxes. Seriously, they will raise a racket for billionaires. But the truth is, the government tyranny Republicans long warned about is here, and many of them are just silent. They enabled it by cutting a $140 billion blank check for Secretary Noem to deploy masked ICE and CBP agents to terrorize our communities.
ICE was spending beyond their funded level, so last summer, Republicans handed Kristi Noem enough cash to fund an army, and she is using that blank check to send masked men door to door asking for papers, charging into houses without a warrant, breaking car windows without a reason, staking out school zones, and dragging citizens and legal residents hundreds of miles away without so much as confirming their immigration status or charging them with a crime.
If Republicans are serious about their warnings on government tyranny, they must work with us to put an end to the insane attacks we have seen, including on Americans' most basic rights, but right now, we still have some Republicans who are seriously insisting masks have to stay on Trump's secret police and who are insisting DHS cannot be required to get judicial warrants before breaking into your home.
We have a few Republicans acknowledging the violence we have seen from ICE and CBP that must end, but we need to see more real, tangible progress to rein these Agencies in through legislation--basic constraints upheld by law.
Democrats are not asking for the Moon. We are not trying to overhaul immigration laws. We are insisting on basic measures to protect our constitutional rights and hold these Agencies accountable to some of the most basic standards as local police. After all, if
The American people need us to meet this moment. We need to rein in ICE and CBP. We need to call out the avalanche of lies. Most importantly, we need to stand up for our communities because they are being terrorized by their own government.
It is not targeted law enforcement when Trump sends 8,000 Federal agents into one city and has them go door to door, especially not when agents literally tell people they are asking for papers solely because of how someone looks or speaks. It is not about our immigration laws when Trump is grabbing people who are following the law, people who have green cards in the mail, and even people who are U.S. citizens. It is not about stopping violent criminals when ICE is staking out schools and grabbing parents during pickup. In fact, just this week, we saw that the administration's own data shows that only a tiny fraction of people they have detained are violent criminals.
They have also taken military spouses, taken parents of marines. They have even taken veterans. In fact, last week, they deported a veteran. Do my colleagues hear me here? Trump deported a veteran. Think about that. Sit with that. We cannot look away from what is happening in our country. Men who fought for our freedom are being denied theirs, being exiled from the country they risked their lives for.
Meanwhile, children--kids--who have done nothing wrong are having their parents snatched away from them or are being snatched up themselves in a cruel ploy to use them as leverage.
Given how outrageous, how lawless, how heartlessly un-American Trump's crackdown has become, it is clear why people across the country are demanding action. And I don't just mean in opinion polls, though the polls do actually overwhelmingly support action to rein in ICE, and even Republican voters think ICE has gone way too far. But I also mean people are demanding action in a great American way: protesting, using their voice, speaking out, putting a spotlight on what ICE and CBP are doing to their friends and to their neighbors.
The Trump administration's response to that great American tradition, to the First Amendment in action, has been about as unhinged and un- American as it gets. The level of wanton violence and lawlessness we are seeing out of ICE and CBP is without comparison in recent U.S. history. It is the kind of stuff you expect out of Putin's Russia. Agents are saying things to protesters like ``I will put a bullet in your head if you don't shut up'' or ``You raise your voice, I erase your voice.''
The actions are even worse than the words. How many peaceful protesters have to be tear-gassed before Republicans think this is a problem? How many children? Wasn't the video of a driveby gassing bad enough? What about the photo of the man pinned to the ground getting sprayed in his face? How many car windows have to be shattered and people dragged from their cars? No warrant, no nothing. Were you not outraged to see that woman on the way to a doctor's appointment dragged out of her vehicle for no reason? Were you not appalled to learn agents shattered a glass car window, dragged away a mother, and left a 1- month-old baby in the back of the vehicle, blanket covered in glass shards? Were you not alarmed to watch an agent point a rifle at a car window of someone sitting in their own driveway and bust out the window with a gun?
How many people does ICE have to detain before Republicans stop sitting on their hands? How many kids do they have to attack like the young man at the Target that they slammed to the ground, marched off with, and then dropped him off miles away--no charges--once they realized he was a U.S. citizen? There is also the time they tackled a pregnant woman or the time they marched a citizen out of his house in his underwear in freezing weather.
Agents have recklessly caused car accidents, only to arrest the person they ran into and then make things up. Agents have even tried to round up witnesses of their crimes, rush them out of the State and through deportation before they can testify at a trial.
How many people have to be murdered by Federal agents in cold blood until Republicans join us to stop this tyranny? How many lies will Republicans tolerate--because we have witnessed brazen and dangerous lies from this administration. They lied about Alex Pretti brandishing a gun when he clearly never touched it. They lied about Renee Good trying to target agents with her car when she was clearly just trying to drive away. They lied about a young woman ramming CBP agents before they shot her, only to drop the case against her. Newly released body cam footage shows the agent turned his wheel toward her vehicle.
They said that an L.A. man was shot after he weaponized his vehicle and began ramming law enforcement, but body cam footage shows an agent's gun go off by accident as he switched hands. They said someone in detainment died from suicide, when an autopsy found it was a homicide. They said someone got eight fractures in his skull from running into a wall on purpose. The man says he was beaten. Greg Bovino said he deployed tear gas on a crowd after someone threw a rock at him, only to admit the truth in court when confronted by video evidence. The list goes on. And that is just lies we know about.
Enough.
Law enforcement cannot be lawless. That is exactly what we are seeing from ICE and CBP. As Democrats have made abundantly clear, we cannot continue funding a rogue Department without substantial reform. Accountability at DHS must be written into law.
Now, my Democratic counterparts and I have been at the table the whole time. We have put forth incredibly reasonable reforms--reforms that would increase accountability and transparency and compliance with constitutional rights, reforms that do not impact DHS' ability to detain convicted violent criminals. We remain committed and ready to land a funding bill that enshrines those reforms into law and ensures FEMA and TSA and other important functions get funded. But we cannot kick the can down the road as Republicans want us to do. The time to rein in these rogue Agencies is right now. We cannot waste another moment.
If Republicans refuse to make the changes that the American people are demanding, they are forcing a Republican shutdown of DHS. The chaos, the brutality--all of it--have happened at the explicit direction of this President and a Republican Congress that wrote him a blank check for ICE and CBP. If Republicans want Democratic votes to fix that, then they need to understand half measures will not cut it.
What Democrats are demanding is reasonable, and it is necessary. None of what we are asking for is extreme for local law enforcement, so why don't those basic standards apply to ICE? There is no good answer.
Sorry, but I don't care if Stephen Miller wants a special force that is empowered to beat up and detain or shoot whomever he doesn't like. In America, we believe in due process. We believe in our Constitution. We believe in law and order, safe streets, law enforcement we can trust. If you don't like that, go to Russia.
So Democrats are focused on getting a bill, but it has to be a bill that reins in the abuses we are seeing from ICE and CBP. Until a bill is negotiated, we cannot kick the can down the road and give license to Noem to continue the chaos with another CR that continues funding for ICE and CBP.
Americans are demanding accountability, and we will settle for nothing less. So given the track record of lawlessness from ICE and CBP, which seems to be growing longer every single day, I will be voting no on the procedural vote today and on Republicans' inadequate proposal.
The alleged withdrawal from Minneapolis is long overdue, but it is not nearly enough to end the chaos and the violence we are seeing nationwide. We need real reform. We cannot let the Trump administration act like things are ``business as usual'' when it is tear-gassing peaceful protesters, detaining people in complete violation of their rights, and even murdering citizens in cold blood. We cannot trust the same people who are lying about what is happening to be truthful about accountability. We cannot trust the same administration that is purposefully trampling our rights and causing this chaos to end it.
Late last night, we received more details on the White House's proposal, and what is clear at this point: It doesn't come close to addressing Americans' grave concerns about how ICE and Border Patrol are operating. So we need to see a lot more movement to rein in these rogue Agencies.
So Congress has to do its job, and I will continue to negotiate in good faith to deliver that reform and accountability we need to see, but we have to stop this outrageous tyranny.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
I ask unanimous consent to waive the mandatory quorum in relation to Calendar No. 311, H.R. 7147.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will read the joint resolution for the third time.
The joint resolution was ordered to a third reading and was read the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The joint resolution having been read the third time, the question is, Shall the joint resolution pass?
I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Johnson), the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Justice), the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. McConnell), and the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Paul).
The result was announced--yeas 49, nays 47, as follows:
The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 142) was passed.
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026: Motion to Proceed: Resumed
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to H.R. 7147, which the clerk will report.
The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 30 minutes for debate, equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, prior to the vote on the motion to invoke cloture.
The Democratic leader.
Mr. President, Americans' views on ICE are crystal clear: The lawlessness, the violence, the chaos must end, and the only real way to do it is through legislation.
Today, Senate Democrats will vote no because we will not support a bill that fails to make any progress on reining in ICE and stopping the violence. Americans are sick of their taxpayer dollars going to masked Federal agents, warrantless searches, and violence--violence--in their communities.
Democrats have been clear. We need legislation to truly halt ICE's abuses. Otherwise, what Tom Homan says today could be reversed by Donald Trump, on a whim, tomorrow. Without legislation, Donald Trump could choose to put a rogue force in any city he wants and have them operate without guardrails at all.
The proposals that Senate and House Democrats presented last week and keep pushing for are very reasonable. We want ICE simply to follow the same standards that law enforcement agencies across the country already follow.
I ask every Republican Senator: Go home. Ask your police officer or ask your sheriff what rules they must abide by.
They are very similar to the rules that we are asking ICE to obey, but right now, ICE is a rogue force. Lawlessness prevails when ICE arrives.
If Republicans want to claim our proposals are nonstarters, they should ask the people back home what they think of masked agents, warrantless searches, and using kids as bait to arrest their parents. These are not actions of real law enforcement. This is thuggery.
The American people need to see meaningful change, and our Republican colleagues must work with us to make that change happen. No more rogue police forces roaming through our cities. Support this legislation.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to yield back all time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the mandatory quorum call under rule XXII has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the motion to proceed to H.R. 7147, a bill making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, and for other purposes, shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant bill clerk called the roll.
The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. McConnell).
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 52, nays 47, as follows:
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 52, and the nays are 47.
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. President, I enter a motion to reconsider.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion is entered.
Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. President, I rise today to pass this legislation by unanimous consent and offer a 2-week continuing resolution so that we can assure the DHS is fully funded while we continue to negotiate.
Two weeks ago, we agreed to extend funding while we talked and tried to find a pathway forward. However, the timeline we knew was going to be short. It took the Democrats until Saturday evening to actually produce legislative text.
Within the next four days, we were able to exchange dialogue and text again. You can take a look at what we have seen from the President and his outreach, what you have seen from the Secretary of Homeland Security and the deployment of body cameras across the country, and what we have heard from Tom Homan today. We are working in good faith to find a pathway forward.
What we are asking is, let us continue to do that. We are asking today for the exact same thing that we had 2 weeks ago: Extend this funding for 2 more weeks so that, as we talk, as we negotiate, TSA agents don't miss a paycheck; so that FEMA workers who are helping to get out disaster relief to people who have been ravaged across this country, and particularly in the South, just in the last 2 weeks--we lost over 60 individuals to the deadly winter storms. There are people who need help, and the people who are working to provide that help for them, they deserve a paycheck.
When we are looking at CBP and ICE continuing to do their work, look at what is happening across the country. It is important that we stand shoulder to shoulder with our law enforcement officers, allowing them to make sure that they keep themselves safe and the communities at large.
There are very important jobs that they have, like HSI agents that go after child pornographers and drug traffickers, that make sure that Americans are safe. HSI has done tremendous work and must continue to be funded.
You look at the Secret Service. The list goes on and on and on. The Secret Service continues to protect not only America's leaders, but it makes sure that when we have events like the World Cup and the Olympics, Americans and those that are living here are safe and secure.
It is clear that we are operating in good faith. We are working to find a pathway forward, and the fact that people, these employees-- people who have stepped up to serve their country--are not going to receive a paycheck, to me, is just totally, completely unacceptable.
Look, we don't have to go down another government shutdown pathway, and that is exactly what this is. By not allowing us time to continue these conversations and shutting the government down, real people will pay the price. These same workers, these same agents who went without a paycheck for 43 days because of the failure of the Democrats to come to the table then--it is exactly what we are seeing now.
It is a choice. It is entirely up to Senate Democrats. We stand here today to say: We are operating in good faith. We have continued to move the ball forward. Let's keep talking. Let's keep working. Let's do a 2- week extension. Don't let anyone miss a paycheck. Let's make sure that we keep Americans safe, coast to coast.
I hope they will make the right choice, but that is entirely up to them.
I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 156, H.R. 4553. And I further ask that the Britt substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, and that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I think our caucus was confused and frustrated by how long it took for our Republican colleagues to come to the table and start discussions.
The minute that we passed a 2-week continuing resolution for the Department of Homeland Security, we knew we were going to have to enter into some hard discussions about how we can rein in ICE's lawlessness, which is what the American people demand. And yet during the first week of that 2-week continuing resolution, there was no clarity over whom we were supposed to be negotiating with. Was it Senate Republicans? Was it the White House?
And, in fact, it wasn't until last night, literally on the verge of the shutdown, that we got our first offer of text from the White House--far too late to be able to engage in any compromise before the deadline.
So I wish we weren't here. I wish our Republican colleagues and the White House had shown more seriousness from the start.
But Senate Democrats have been clear that we have all taken an oath-- an oath to uphold the law of the country--and this Department of Homeland Security, this ICE, is out of control. They are tear-gassing our children's schools. They are killing American citizens. They are disappearing legal migrants.
I went down to Texas, a couple of weeks ago, and sat across a table from two elementary school students who had been detained illegally for 6 weeks over Christmas, while their mother wasn't home. It was a choice ICE made to traumatize and terrorize these children. Those children were alive on the outside but dead on the inside.
So, yes, we believe we have a constitutional obligation to only fund a Department of Homeland Security that is obeying the law, and this Department of Homeland Security is not obeying the law.
So I am hopeful that these discussions will continue. But, frankly, we
We want to fund the Department of Homeland Security, but only a Department that is obeying the law, and for that reason, I would object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. President, look, I am going to say it one more time. We wanted more time. Democrats asked for 2 weeks. Our concern was that 2 weeks wasn't long enough. It took the Democrats a week to articulate what it is they wanted. They articulated it via press conference and via tweet, not by conversation. Let's be clear--not by conversation.
Then it took them a number of more days, from Wednesday to Saturday, to come up with legislative text. We then did the same thing, working back and forward.
Look, you have seen advancements made from the administration. We saw a big announcement made today by Tom Homan. There is no way that you can't say we are working in good faith.
We want to continue this conversation, but yet you are penalizing a TSA agent. A TSA agent is going to go without a paycheck. Why? So that you can posture politically.
I am over it.
Everybody on that side of the aisle knows that ICE and CBP will continue to be funded. They are going to continue to enforce the law just as they should.
Who is going to pay the price? It is the TSA agent. It is the person working at FEMA who already went 43 days without a paycheck, who is trying to figure out how to make things work.
I have reports of TSA agents sleeping in their cars because they can't afford gas, selling plasma to make their bills.
Guys, come on. We are asking to continue a conversation.
When the Biden-Harris failed border policy allowed millions to come across our border unvetted, when there were American citizens who paid the price in that moment--like Jocelyn Nungaray, who was 12 years old and raped and left under a bridge; like Laken Riley, who fought for her life for 17 minutes before her head, her skull was bashed in--and we kept saying: We have got to do more to secure our border.
And our Democratic colleagues said: That takes legislation. It can't be done.
Well, we know that is not true because all we needed was a new President, who secured our border and helps to make our country safe.
Look, I believe we are a nation of immigrants. We are also a nation of laws, and the lawlessness has to stop. But even in the midst of all of that, with fentanyl overdoses at an all-time high, we didn't shut the Department down, not one time. And, today, Democrats are choosing to shut the Department down.
We have exchanged text. That is what you do in a negotiation. You work to find a pathway forward. There was an announcement today that shows we are operating in good faith. I don't know why people who have nothing to do with this are going to have to pay the price for us continuing to work to find a pathway forward.
It would be different if we had thrown up our hands and said: Nah, we are not going to send you anything back.
We want this to work. We believe in our laws. We believe in enforcing them. And we believe in the men and women who do that.
And so this is an unfortunate day. It is a sad day. It is, certainly, not one that had to happen.
I want to be very clear: All we are asking for is 2 weeks to continue this conversation, to figure out how to make this work, and to do what is right for all American citizens.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. President, I just want to reiterate that we got the language last night. We have been in a 2-week continuing resolution, and last night, we got the first offer of legislation from the White House.
We are not in charge. The Senate Democrats aren't in charge. We don't run the House. We don't run the White House.
We waited for a week for there to be some process to be convened. We got no signal as to what that negotiation would look like. So we finally put our proposals--our text--on the table and didn't get an offer back until last night.
My wish is for my Republican colleagues to be just as upset as they are about what is going to happen next week at TSA or at FEMA as for the children that are being traumatized right now in this country, who are being thrown into what is called the ``Baby Jail,'' outside of San Antonio; for the lives that are fundamentally changed by an immigration policy that is out of control; to have concern for the American citizens who have been killed simply exercising their First Amendment rights; to care about the 4 million Americans who are losing their insurance, as we speak, because this administration has chosen to put money into a lawless immigration enforcement operation instead of protecting people's healthcare.
That is what is happening in America today. Four million people are losing their healthcare insurance. Twenty million people are having their rates go through the roof because the priority is flooding Minneapolis with ICE agents; chasing down kids at schoolbus stops, as they were doing just 2 days ago in Minneapolis, instead of protecting people's healthcare.
People are losing healthcare in this country so as to fund this runaway Department of Homeland Security.
And so we all have outrage about what is happening in this country today, and I don't know why it took the White House until last night to send any semblance of specifics on what they were willing to work for.
We have an obligation, as Members of Congress, to fund a government that obeys the law. This Department of Homeland Security is not obeying the law. They are not. And I would argue that every Member of this body, whether you were a Republican or a Democrat, in order to uphold your oath of office, should not be funding an Agency that isn't complying with the Constitution and the statutes of the United States.
So I do regret that we are at a moment in which we are not going to be able to fund the Department of Homeland Security, but there is a simple solution. If the Agency starts behaving lawfully, if they start obeying the Constitution, then we can get back on the same page.
This is an exceptional moment in this country's history, and my hope is that these negotiations move fast, expeditiously, and that perhaps, as soon as we return--or if the majority leader would like to call us back into session next week--we can get the Department back up and operating. But that is only going to happen with reforms.
That is only going to happen with more serious engagement from the White House than has happened thus far.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. President, I think that these children do matter, and I think the half a million unaccompanied kids that came across the border during the Biden-Harris administration matter too--many of them with phone numbers safety-pinned to them or written on their arm.
The Biden-Harris administration got rid of the DNA policy to make sure that these kids were going to family members. These kids were lost; many of them still are.
What we heard Tom Homan say today--today, the day we are voting to say: Can we continue this conversation? Can a TSA officer still get a paycheck while we talk?--is he said that there was a significant drawdown there in Minnesota. He said: Operations were successful and that 3,000 kids who had been lost had been found.
Now, I remember coming down here and talking about that. I remember talking about these kids that had wandered across the border.
But we deserve better. America deserves better. These kids deserve better. And this is really simple.
Are we negotiating in good faith? If it takes you over 8 days to get us legislative text and we are able to turn that around in a couple of days, you have an announcement like you have today, it
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. President, so DHS apparently is going to shut down. Hopefully, we can get it back open. What is this all about? Obey the law?
You know what. I have an idea for you if you want people to obey the law in this country: Do away with sanctuary cities.
Senator Murphy is from Connecticut. It is 1 of 12 sanctuary States. What does that mean? Local officials, State officials, refuse to work with the Federal Government to turn people over to the Federal Government as required by Federal law. So you want to obey the law in Connecticut? Stop being a sanctuary State.
You want to fix immigration? Have policies that make sense.
You all act like, for 4 years, Biden wasn't President. Every Democratic Senator aided and abetted the Biden administration with a massive invasion of this country. You turned the other way. You never said a word. You let Biden obliterate our border. You let him send people into the interior on planes, trains, and automobiles. Only God knows what happened, who is here. You sat by, and you did nothing.
And here is what I have learned about my friends on the Democratic side: They are never going to agree to deport anybody because all their proposals make it pretty much impossible to deport anybody.
Body cameras, that makes sense. If you want to find out how to make ICE more professional, count me in.
But your proposal is to require a judicial warrant to deport somebody. Can you imagine how many judges you would need if you got 15 million illegal people here, to go get a warrant from a judge? This is not a criminal proceeding. This is an administrative proceeding. The President, as the Commander in Chief, has the ability to detain and deport people administratively. You don't need a Federal judge.
You are trying to create a mechanism so we will fail cleaning up your mess. We got elected to clean up your mess.
We are going to hold ICE agents accountable if they went too far. Tom Homan went to Minnesota to turn the heat down. Great.
Democratic politicians all over this country have been turning the heat up. You are wedded to lousy, dangerous policies.
Senator Murphy, why don't you get Connecticut right with Federal law?
Here is what has happened: We got 12 sanctuary States, 200-plus sanctuary communities, 25,000 people--ICE has requested a detainer, ignored for 2 years. States have refused to work with ICE for 25,000 people that have a detainer at the Federal level.
Sanctuary city law is a magnet for future illegal immigration. Sanctuary city policies are full of fraud like in Minneapolis. They bring out the worst in the system, not the best, and it breaks down law and order.
We have been talking for weeks about you wanting to fix things. You are blocking a debate. I can't believe I am here. I thought we were going to work together to try to find out how to reform ICE and also address the bottom-line problem, which is sanctuary city law abuse. That is the problem--not ICE, not Miller, not me, not Noem--policies that have been in place that entice more illegal immigration.
Every Democratic Senator turned the other way during the 4 years of Biden. You didn't do anything to bring reason to chaos.
How many of you spoke about Laken Riley? Talking about children being abused, how many thousands of people have been raped and abused, stolen and mistreated because of this invasion of illegal immigrants from virtually all over the world with people from gangs, you name it. So you never talk about the victims.
Just want to talk about TV in Minnesota. I am all for these ICE agents being reviewed. I am all for making them more professional. But I am not all for stopping the mandate that President Trump was given, which is to deal with illegal immigration and the criminal elements therein.
So I have legislation, S. 3805, and it says: If a State or local official does not turn over to the Federal Government an illegal immigrant who is facing criminal charges, been convicted or facing criminal charges, then that State or local official can go to jail.
You have an obligation under Federal law to turn these people over. Sanctuary States and cities--25,000 ICE detainers denied. Twenty-five thousand people that should be deported have not been turned over to the Federal Government because of these 12 States and these 200 sanctuary cities. Let's get to the root cause of the problem.
I am going to ask unanimous consent that we vote on S. 3805. That would make it a crime for a State or local official not to turn over to Federal authorities a criminal illegal immigrant, somebody who is charged with a crime or convicted with a crime. And if you don't turn them over, you would face punishment. That will stop illegal sanctuary city policy. If people knew they would go to jail for breaking Federal law, I think they would stop.
You have had weeks, and we are not even debating. You are never going to change. If you want to have immigration policed, our Democratic friends will never be there for you. They turned their back on you and your family and allowed this Nation to be invaded by 10, 15, 20 million people--who the hell knows.
We are trying to fix it. We are trying to fix it, and we are not going to give up. And until you change the policies, you never stop illegal immigration.
If there are 12 States that have sanctuary status, they will keep coming. All they have to do is get to one of these States. It is magnets for future illegal immigration. It breaks down law and order, and it needs to stop.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 318, S. 3805; further, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from California.
Mr. President, reserving the right to object. I understand that this is a very important subject for my passionate colleague from South Carolina, but I also think there is a very fundamental misunderstanding, at a minimum, about what sanctuary policies are and what sanctuary policies are not.
Now, as I was listening to my colleague, he has tried to paint a picture of sanctuary States or sanctuary cities as nothing but lawless, and I get that it is maybe a favorite sound bite for rightwing media, but the fact of the matter is it is not true.
Sanctuary policies do not mean that there are no laws or that the Federal Government can no longer enforce Federal law in those jurisdictions. What sanctuary policies are is simply an affirmation that immigration enforcement is the job of the Federal Government and that State and local authorities cannot be co-opted or forced into performing inherently Federal responsibilities. It means that while Federal Agencies carry out immigration enforcement, State and local law enforcement will choose to focus their time, their energy, their resources on public safety in the local communities.
So let me say that again as clearly as I can: Sanctuary policies do not prevent ICE from going into any State or any city to arrest the violent criminals that the administration says they are after when they are being released from prison.
And, by the way, it is not like ICE does not know when someone is arrested. In fact, the Federal Government is notified every single time an individual is booked into a jail or prison. This means nothing is preventing ICE from picking up individuals when they are released from custody.
But instead of prioritizing picking up the dangerous, violent criminals they talk so much about, what is ICE doing instead? They are out roving streets in communities across the country and arresting people based on the color of their skin or the language that they speak or their perceived occupation.
There is a term for this, by the way. These are now known as the Kavanaugh stops because of Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh--and, by extension, the majority of the Supreme Court--sanctioning this practice. It is wrong.
Now, I know my colleagues disagree with sanctuary policies as they are--official, technical. He describes sanctuary policies as ``killing this country.'' I have heard that a few times. And that by enacting sanctuary policies, leaders in these States are somehow ``openly defying federal law.''
Again, wrong. You can have your own opinion, but you can't own the facts. Far from defying Federal law, courts have actually upheld sanctuary laws and policies. I will reference just one. In a 1997 ruling in Printz v. United States, Justice Scalia wrote:
That sure doesn't sound like anyone is defying any Federal law to me. And nobody is accusing Justice Scalia as having been a leftwing radical.
And, yes, we do have more recent examples of courts rejecting the Trump administration's attempts to strong-arm cities and States into acting as Federal immigration agents.
Let me just say this: These policies that my Republican colleagues are determined to attack are not the reason for the chaos that the American people have been watching in horror unfold in the cities of Los Angeles, in Chicago, in Minneapolis, and so many others. Sanctuary policies aren't the reason why American cities and citizens are being pepper-sprayed or tear-gassed, beaten, unlawfully detained, or even shot in broad daylight like Renee Good and Alex Pretti. What is endangering the American people's safety and security is an out-of- control administration that has empowered a mass paramilitary force of ICE and CBP agents to act with impunity, without accountability, without oversight, and without consequences.
If we truly want to talk about public safety, then we need to be talking about reining in an out-of-control Department of Homeland Security, not scapegoating States and cities that choose to prioritize their local resources for their local public safety.
So, for the sake of the American people's safety and well-being, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. President, I thank my good friend Senator Padilla.
No. 1, we are going to have an election in November. Senator Padilla says that sanctuary policies are not part of the problem. I think they are. I think the American people believe that, when 12 States refuse to cooperate with the Federal Government when it comes to enforcing Federal law, they become sanctuary States and cities, and it entices more illegal immigration.
Do you know why we are not voting on my amendment? It is because most people don't agree with him, and they are afraid to vote. The only reason we are not voting on my amendment is that you would have to go back and tell the country why you voted against stopping sanctuary city policy, which is one of the biggest magnets of illegal immigration that leads to massive fraud and the breakdown of law and order.
The parties are in two different places. Democrats and Senator Padilla believe that sanctuary policies are no problem. The Republicans, including me and President Trump, believe we will never have orderly immigration until you get to the root cause of the problem. You have got 12 very liberal States and 200 cities that refuse to work with the Federal Government to turn over people who are subject to deportation.
I have an amendment that is being blocked that would make it a crime for a State or a Federal official who has custody of an illegal immigrant who is facing criminal charges or who has been convicted of criminal charges not to turn him over to the Federal Government to be handled and deported. They don't want that vote. You are never going to stop sanctuary cities until you make the people in charge of the State and the city pay a price for ignoring Federal law.
To the American people, you are not wrong to believe sanctuary city policy is bad for your country. Democrats are wrong to support it and want to continue it.
So what do we hear on the floor today? Not only is it that they don't believe it is a problem but that they wish to continue it.
This is why I want a vote. We are going to have a vote on this. You want to continue these policies. You don't think they are a problem. I want to end them. Let's have a vote, a debate and a vote. You bring up any amendment you want to bring up about making ICE better, defund it. Whatever you want to bring up I will vote on, but you are denying me a vote today on the root cause of the problem because you have absolutely no interest in recognizing it to be the root cause of the problem.
As a matter of fact, the Senator said I am wrong to believe that sanctuary policy is bad for our country.
No. You are wrong. You are wrong to have turned your back on the 15 million, 10 million, 20 million coming into our country for 4 years. You are wrong to sit by and watch these States obliterate the law. There are 25,000 people that local governments and State governments refuse to turn over to ICE who are eligible to be turned over, and there are 8 million people in these illegal sanctuary States and cities.
This is a debate worthy of the U.S. Senate and of a great nation.
Is Senator Padilla right that sanctuary policies are not bad for the country and that they should continue or am I right that we should reform ICE but that we also should end the biggest magnet to illegal immigration out there, I think, which are 12 States that violate, routinely, Federal law?
There are 12 States wherein, if an illegal believes you can get there, you are never going to leave the country. If we don't fix this problem, we will never fix illegal immigration. In the Gang of 8 bill, we actually fixed this problem.
So what have I learned?
I have learned that I can't get a vote on an amendment that would require State and local officials to obey the law or go to jail themselves when it comes to criminal illegal aliens.
My amendment says, if you have got a criminal in your custody and you don't turn the criminal over to the Federal Government, as you are supposed to, you could go to jail. They should go to jail. We can't have that vote. We can't have that debate.
This is a phenomenal day for the U.S. Senate. We have got the Senator from California overtly saying: We have no desire to change sanctuary policy. We think it is OK. Then we have got me and all of us on this side saying that you need to end this; that this will continue.
I am sad and disappointed we didn't have a bunch of votes today. Why aren't we voting? Because they blocked it. Why aren't we defunding DHS? Because they don't want to talk and fix the problem.
So here is the deal: No matter what--no matter how this ends--I am going to stay on this until I can't stay on it anymore. I want a simple vote as a U.S. Senator to have a debate as to whether or not sanctuary city policy, State policy, is bad for America or good for America. I think it is terrible for America.
For those engaging in sanctuary city practices, you are hurting the other 38 States. You are creating chaos for your country, and you should be held accountable.
One last thought: There was a clerk of the court in Kentucky who was a very religious woman. She did not want to recognize a gay marriage in Kentucky. She issued marriage licenses. The Supreme Court ruled that gay marriage was the law of the land. She refused. I said she needed to do her job. She went to jail for 5 days, and she should have because you can't let your personal opinion take over your government function. You can't just obey the laws you like.
It is the same thing here--and every liberal clapped when I did that. It is the same thing here. If you have got a Governor or a mayor who will not turn over a criminal illegal immigrant, as required by Federal law, they should go to jail.
I want a vote. I want a debate. I am not going to let this go. The battle lines have been drawn.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
Mr. President, elections are the bedrock of our American
That is why the revamped, new-and-made-worse SAVE Act, which was passed by the House last night and is designed to compel States to give over to Donald Trump their voter rolls, is not just a solution in search of a problem; it is also a very bad solution at that.
This bill is built on a myth that is rooted in the Big Lie of election denial that has poisoned our democracy for years, which is that supposed noncitizen voter fraud occurs with any meaningful frequency. It is the same Big Lie that is still being perpetrated by Kurt Olsen, who is the President's ``Stop the Steal'' lawyer now working in the White House and on President Trump's decision to send the Director of National Intelligence to Fulton County, GA, last month, to seize paper ballots from the 2020 election--ballots that have already been counted at least three times in three different ways and that have all reached the same election outcome.
The fact of the matter is that audit after audit and investigation after investigation in red States and in blue States have all reached the same conclusion, which is that voting by noncitizens--which, by the way, is already a felony--is so exceedingly rare that it is statistically almost nonexistent, which tells us something very important, though. It means our current laws are working; so we don't need new documentation requirements like passports and birth certificates.
By the way, 21 million Americans cannot readily access these documents. We shouldn't be risking the disenfranchisement of 69 million American women who have changed their names from what is printed on their birth certificates, most of whom made that change when they got married, and we don't need to force approximately 60 million Americans who live in rural communities to drive up to hundreds of miles to prove their eligibility in person. That is not election security. That is actually voter suppression.
It is important for the American people to understand that this Republican effort to jam the SAVE Act through--as they call it--isn't happening in isolation. There is a bigger picture here. This bill is part of a broader effort by Trump and his Republican enablers to lay the groundwork for the rigging of upcoming elections, including the midterms this November. Now, November might seem like a long way off, but the midterms have already begun. Primary ballots have been mailed out in many jurisdictions, and the first round of early voting begins today in some jurisdictions.
It is pretty clear which way the political winds are blowing. The American people are rightly frustrated by Donald Trump's failed economic policies that are raising costs for working families, and the American people are increasingly outraged by the cruel, violent mass deportation campaign unfolding in communities across the country, which has already cost two innocent American citizens their lives.
It seems to me that the SAVE Act is really only intended to save Republicans and Trump from facing the consequences of their failed policies, but rather than change their policies, Republicans would rather change the election rules.
How many times have we heard the President openly question our election system and why the Federal Government shouldn't run elections?
At one point, he said:
Well, let me answer that question for the President. It is really simple.
It is because the Constitution says otherwise. The Constitution clearly entrusts elections to the States and to Congress, not to the President.
But those efforts to interfere are underway and ongoing. We have seen the Department of Justice sue 24 States that happen to be led by Democrats. They are targeting their voter rolls in addition to the intimidation and strong-arm tactics.
We also know that Donald Trump says he regrets not issuing an Executive order in his first term that directs the military to illegally seize voting machines. He is not shy about this, folks. He thinks he has the Department of Homeland Security now more willing to carry out such illegal actions this time around. So, yes, the threat is real.
Or consider his former White House adviser who has called on the President to deploy ICE to intimidate U.S. citizens who will be trying to vote this November. So let's be absolutely clear: That is already illegal. Armed Federal agents at polling locations is voter intimidation and has no place in our democracy. Think about that. Think about that. Using Federal force to intimidate voters at the polls? It is hard to imagine anything more un-American.
So that is why, today, colleagues, I am announcing a new amendment to the Department of Homeland Security funding bill that is still being negotiated and deliberated. It is an amendment to explicitly bar any Federal funds from being used to deploy Federal law enforcement or military personnel to polling places or election offices for the purpose of voter intimidation or election interference.
It is amazing we would have to say that. It is amazing that we would have to think about addressing that, but that is what the President wants. Now don't put it past him to try. It is time to send the administration a clear message that the United States of America's elections will be decided by the voters, not by force.
Colleagues, we as a Congress have a responsibility to act to protect the elections entrusted by the Constitution to us and to the States before it is too late.
We have a responsibility to reject this SAVE Act, to keep Federal law enforcement away from polling locations, and to make clear once and for all that elections and our sacred right to the ballot box belongs to the people.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. I recognize the Senator from Florida.
As the newest, most junior Member from the great State-- the free State of Florida, I rise today--as well as the proud granddaughter of a World War II Army veteran--and I rise today to congratulate Mr. Duane Brewton of Cantonment, FL, on the extraordinary occasion of his 109th birthday celebrated on February 5, 2026.
Mr. Brewton is Florida's oldest living World War II veteran and among the oldest surviving veterans of the Second World War in the United States. He is a proud member of what history rightly calls the ``Greatest Generation''--ordinary Americans who answered the call, did extraordinary things, and helped save the world.
They did not do it for recognition. They did not ask for praise. They simply did their duty. Honoring their service while they are still with us is both a privilege and a responsibility.
When his country called, Duane Brewton answered. He served from 1944 to 1945 as a private in the U.S. Army during the Second World War. He was stationed in Vire, France, where he was wounded in the line of duty and later returned home.
For his sacrifice, he was awarded the Purple Heart, a lasting testament to his courage, humility, and devotion to freedom. The world owes a debt to Mr. Brewton and to his generation that can never be repaid.
Born and raised in Pensacola, FL, Mr. Brewton returned home after the war. He raised a family and devoted his life to faith, service, and community.
A devout Christian, he lived his values daily and by example. His daughters recall that throughout their childhood, their father rose every single morning at 4 a.m. to study the Bible and pray, an enduring memory that shaped their lives and reflected the quiet strength of his character.
That faith extended far beyond his home. Mr. Brewton was a founder of the Brownsville Assembly of God in Pensacola, a church that continues to serve his community today.
Through his life, he set a shining example--before his children, his family, all who knew him, and to us--of what it means to honor God and country.
May we all strive to live with the same humility, discipline, and integrity that he has shown for more than a century--109 years, to be exact.
In recent years, Mr. Brewton has resided in an assisted living community where he is deeply loved by residents and staff alike. I am told that they are all watching today.
On his 109th birthday, it was marked by a joyful celebration of family, friends, and community members gathering in great numbers. Surrounded by his two daughters and loved ones, the occasion was fittingly warm and celebratory--centered, as it should be, on a man whose life had meant so much to so many.
Florida is the proud home to more than 1.4 million veterans. Florida is also home to the second largest number of living World War II veterans, a distinction we hold with deep gratitude and respect.
We honor their service, we cherish their presence and recognize our responsibility to preserve their stories and sacrifices.
Mr. Brewton embodies the very best of Florida and, indeed, the very best of America: faith, family, humility, duty, and service. His life stands as a living reminder of the generation that answered the call, endured unimaginable hardship, and secured liberty for generations that they would never meet.
On behalf of the people of Florida and a grateful nation, I congratulate Mr. Duane Brewton on his 109th birthday, thank him for his extraordinary service, and wish him another joyous year surrounded by faith, family, and the enduring appreciation of a nation forever indebted to him.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. I recognize the Senator from Tennessee.
We have had quite a feisty afternoon here on the floor, and I am so pleased that my colleagues have called out some of the actions that we have witnessed from the other side.
It is beyond me that they would want illegal aliens to vote in U.S. elections--beyond me. But maybe they don't want to preserve ``one person, one vote.'' Maybe that is not important to them. It is important to 80 percent of the American people.
And, you know, they are not wanting to fund DHS, and they are saying: Oh, it is over ICE. ICE is funded. Their money is going to continue. But what they are doing, they are defunding FEMA. They are defunding TSA. So if your flights don't go next week, blame the Democrats.
And this week we had a hearing in Judiciary Committee that looked at another inappropriate use of the Federal Government's inappropriate policies. And this week I chaired the first in a series of hearings at Judiciary Committee that will address Arctic Frost and the Arctic Frost investigation that targeted President Trump, elected Members of Congress, including me, and hundreds--hundreds--of conservative groups and individuals.
Now, the subcommittee I chair is on Privacy, Technology, and the Law. And we called before us the general counsels--legal representatives from Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile--the three wireless carriers that received unlawful subpoena requests from Jack Smith to access our phone records.
Now, what we know--because of whistleblowers--these are people that work over at DOJ. They are whistleblowers. They saw what was happening, and they said: This is wrong.
So we know what Mr. Smith was up to. What he and Merrick Garland and Joe Biden did was to weaponize the U.S. Federal Government to target President Donald Trump and his allies.
Just days after President Trump announced his 2024 campaign, President Biden named Jack Smith as special counsel. And with the approval of the Biden Justice Department, he issued 197 subpoenas to over 430 conservative organizations and individuals. Among them were more than a dozen sitting Members of Congress, including me and my Judiciary Committee colleagues Senators Graham, Lee, Cruz, and Hawley.
Now, the question would be: What does this set of individuals have in common? What we know is this: We are all Republicans; we all support President Trump; and each of us had valid questions about the 2020 election.
So here is Jack Smith, who was probably inappropriately appointed as special counsel. We never took a vote. He didn't have a statute that allowed him to be the special counsel. But he goes to great lengths to make certain that we could never find out about this deep invasion of our privacy and the violation of our constitutional rights. So he went to an Obama appointee, Judge James Boasberg, who signed nondisclosure orders--or you may call them a gag order. They did this to ensure that the subpoenas were going to be kept secret from us.
Now, the basis for the gag orders was this: that notifying the Members of Congress being spied on could possibly result in destruction of evidence, intimidation of potential witnesses, serious jeopardy to the investigation. I am reading that from the gag order. Imagine that.
We also know that Jack Smith's corrupt team of prosecutors consulted with the Biden DOJ Public Integrity Section about the subpoenas. They were informed--get this: The Public Integrity Section actually informed Jack Smith and his group that there was litigation risk for doing this. Oh, my goodness. That would be a violation of the speech or debate clause that covers Members of Congress while they are doing their job-- a constitutional defense.
Now, the speech or debate clause gives us broad constitutional protection from executive branch interference. This is what you call keeping the executive branch from running over the people's elected representatives. But the Biden DOJ--they were out for Donald Trump. They wanted to block him from ever being President. They wanted to go get him six ways from Sunday. They were after him. So they decided: Well, there is a risk, but if you put a gag order on it, they are never going to find out. So let's go ahead. Let's roll the dice, and let's go for it. Let's abuse their right to privacy. Let's infringe on the speech or debate clause. Let's get in and tear up the Stored Communications Act. All because they wanted to go after Donald Trump.
Well, thank God we have whistleblowers, and these whistleblowers over at DOJ came to Chairman Grassley. He started working on this. And, you know what, we did find out. We learned that Verizon and T-Mobile complied with the subpoena request--no questions asked, no concern for constitutional rights; they just rolled over without a fight.
During yesterday's hearing, we got to ask them: Why did you comply with these secret, unlawful subpoenas? Did getting a gag order on it not raise a red flag to you? Why did you do this?
The answer was not satisfactory. The representative for Verizon said they were aware of the speech or debate clause--good for them--but they had no system in place to flag subpoena requests for sitting Members of Congress. But, oh, they say they have learned a lesson. As he put it, ``Our processes could have been better suited to meet what was a new and unique set of circumstances.''
Well, you know what, we are turning 250 years old. I don't think the Constitution is exactly new. I don't think the speech or debate clause is exactly new. I think their response was actually an understatement.
Verizon utterly failed in its responsibility. So did T-Mobile. In fact, the company was under a specific contract that required it to notify the Senate Sergeant at Arms about subpoenas related to Senators. I think Verizon forgot that.
Yet not a single person at Verizon or any of the carriers lost their job because of this. I went down the road: Has anyone been fired? The answer was no and no and no, not a single person.
There has to be accountability. If they can trample on the constitutional rights of sitting Members of Congress and the President of the United States, they can do it to every U.S. citizen. We cannot let this stand.
Arctic Frost marked the worst weaponization of government in American history--worse than Watergate--and I am determined to make certain that Jack Smith is held accountable and that no American citizen--no one-- ever is going to face the weaponization of the U.S. Government against them.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. President, I rise today in support of the SAVE
I consider myself uniquely qualified when I say that every vote matters. In 2022, I lost my first statewide election in Pennsylvania by 950 votes. That is 14 votes per county. I won my second election in 2024 by 15,000 votes--of over 7 million cast. These incredibly narrow races, each of which had electoral issues of their own, show just how important it is that our elections run smoothly, fairly, and that only legitimate votes are counted. And right now, we cannot--we must not-- pretend that all elections in America meet this important standard.
Just last year--just last year--in my home State of Pennsylvania, Chester County officials mistakenly omitted 7,000 third-party votes from the voter rolls. Registered voters were turned away at the polls, and an unknown number of unverified voters cast regular ballots.
Every single time Americans hear about election problems like those in Chester County, they rightly question the integrity of our electoral process.
It should come as no surprise to us that according to a recent Scripps and Ipsos poll, more than half of Americans--more than half-- are concerned about noncitizens voting and more than half fear electoral fraud.
The bottom line is we cannot stand in this Chamber and claim there is not a problem. There is a problem, and the people who put us here agree.
Colleagues, we have a duty to root out the source of this distrust and restore the integrity of our democratic process.
As we celebrate America's 250th anniversary, we must not put to chance what John Adams called ``the primary right by which all other rights are protected.'' That is why I support Senator Lee's SAVE America Act. This bill will not fix every issue with our elections, but it does three critical things.
First, it prevents noncitizens from voting by requiring people to show proof of citizenship when registering to vote and to show a government-issued photo ID when casting a ballot.
Second, it directs the States to remove noncitizens from their voter rolls by mandating regular reviews of those lists and giving States the abilities and the tools to accomplish this critical task.
Finally, it improves accountability by strengthening the enforcement of the current law and imposing penalties on election officials who violate the law by registering noncitizens to vote.
Now, the requirements for voter ID and proof of citizenship in particular have been twisted and misrepresented. Let me set the record straight. Federal law mandates that only U.S. citizens may vote. However, under the Supreme Court's interpretation, voters are not required to show proof of citizenship. The risk is clear.
According to the Department of Homeland Security, over 10 million illegal immigrants entered our country during the last administration and a total of at least 22 million noncitizens reside in the United States. In 19 States, noncitizens can obtain a driver's license, and in some cases, that driver's license automatically registers them to vote. This is an unacceptable vulnerability in our election integrity. For that reason, it is now incumbent on Congress to close the loophole. We must secure the fundamental principle that voting is a right reserved only for American citizens.
The SAVE America Act also requires voters to show a government ID when casting a ballot. Now, I have heard some claim this is too high a barrier. Let's be serious. We ask Americans to show an ID to buy a beer, to board a plane, to donate blood, to apply for benefits, to even get married, but when it comes to electing leaders who decide the direction of our country, write our laws, and command our Armed Forces, no ID is required. That is absolutely absurd.
Now, many on the left look at our electoral system and say: There is nothing to see here, no issue, no problem. But that is what they said about wide-open borders. That is what they said about censoring conservatives online. That is what they said about the botched Afghanistan withdrawal. That is what they said about President Biden's cognitive decline. They were wrong on all those things, and they are wrong on this, too, and they are out of step with the country.
Americans of all political persuasions have supported tighter election laws for decades. In 2005, former President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, joined former Secretary of State Jim Baker, a Republican, to form a Commission on election integrity. They identified voter ID laws as the single most important reform that was needed--20 years ago.
A vast majority of the American people agree. As we see here on a poll from the Pew Research Center, 95 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of Democrats polled all support voter ID. My friends, if an 80- 20 issue such as this cannot get 60 votes in this 100-person Chamber, something is amiss.
Now, some of my colleagues have raised concerns regarding voter suppression. They warn that many U.S. citizens do not have a hard copy proving their citizenship. The SAVE America Act directly addresses this concern. It puts in place alternate documentation options, State verification processes, and other protections that will ensure citizens are not disenfranchised.
I also hear some of my colleagues voice fears of Federal overreach. As a conservative, I believe that the less government interference in people's lives, the better. But the SAVE America Act does not federalize our elections. Article I, section 4 of the Constitution makes clear that while States determine the time, place, and manner of Federal elections, the Congress ``may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations''; that is, we in the Congress, in this body, have the constitutional authority to set certain rules of the road nationwide. The SAVE America Act merely creates a mechanism to verify that State elections comply with existing law.
Now, there are other electoral reforms that are also necessary and critical, including Senator Hagerty's proposed Equal Representation Act, which I am proud to cosponsor.
It ensures that the census does not count noncitizens when determining congressional seats and electoral college votes.
Frankly, I worry. I worry that some on the left oppose the SAVE America Act simply because they want to cheat by allowing noncitizens to vote.
But, at the same time, and as always, for my Democratic colleagues in this body--in the Senate--who oppose this bill, I trust that they are acting in good faith. But I do ask them--I do ask them and all who oppose the SAVE America Act, regardless of party--to consider the extraordinary stakes.
We have the opportunity in this Congress to remove deep vulnerabilities in our elections and to restore America's trust in this core function of our Republic. I can think of few things more important than that, and for that reason, I implore my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting the SAVE America Act.
And if not--and if not--I respectfully challenge you to explain to the clear majority of your constituents why you believe our elections are not in desperate need of repair.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
Mr. President, I actually want to thank my colleague from Pennsylvania for bringing up what I think is a very important subject. I am proud, as you are, coming from a State that had voter ID.
Senator McCormick, you wouldn't necessarily know this, but we passed the first voter ID when I was speaker. I heard all of these arguments, and they fall on deaf ears.
As a matter of fact, if you take a look at the Help America Vote Act and other things, we can make it easy to vote. But we have to make it hard to cheat.
Most people in America don't realize that we estimate about 20 to 25 million people are illegally present in this country. And you should keep in mind that in each of the five last Presidential elections, the margin of victory
So when we say that illegally present people who are able to vote can actually change the outcome of elections, it is not theoretical. It is proven by the math.
So I appreciate your comments.
Mr. President, I am here to talk about a different subject. It sort of relates to the commentary that Senator Blackburn spoke about but only with a little bit different twist.
You see, I think that prosecuting--vindictive prosecution--is wrong, period. Whether the administration is a Democrat or a Republican, vindictive prosecution is wrong, period.
What we are on the brink of with respect to the Chair of the Federal Reserve is the pot calling the kettle black. We can't come here and talk appropriately about the Arctic Frost investigation, we can't talk about the various prosecutions under the Obama era and the Biden era as being bad if we actually condone what I believe, in many cases, are the same sorts of behavior today.
I am a Republican. I voted for President Trump. I support the vast majority of what President Trump is doing. But I think we have a trend here that makes us no better than the people that some of my colleagues are coming down to the floor and criticizing.
At some point, one of the two parties has to stand on principle and end this cycle or it gets worse, and it gets worse, and it gets worse.
Let me give you an example of where I think it is getting bad.
On a Sunday night, about a month or so ago, I saw a report that the Chair of the Fed Board Jerome Powell was being investigated by the DOJ. We all know the President's frustration with Chair Powell. I have got some frustration with him too. I am an armchair quarterback. There are certain things I didn't like him doing, but I never thought of him as a criminal.
But I find out, on a Sunday night, that we have somebody in the bowels of the DC District of the U.S. attorney--an assistant U.S. attorney--who has decided to pursue an investigation and seek an indictment of prosecution against 2 minutes of testimony in the Banking hearing that I attended. I not only attended that Banking hearing, but several of my colleagues did too.
Mr. President, as a matter of fact, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the comments from seven of my colleagues on the Banking Committee.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
Senate Banking Committee Republican Member Statements on Powell DOJ
Mr. President, what this document does, and the reason I thought it was important to put it in the Record, is we have got--let's see--one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, including me, who have said that we don't think a crime was committed. We are on the Banking Committee. We are the majority of the Republicans on the Banking Committee.
I am an old man. So I like watching ``Forensic Files.'' I don't know if young people watch it, but I have been watching it for like 20 or 30 years. I can imagine this being the opening of a ``Forensic File.''
Normally, it is about a perpetrator, and something bad happened. The prosecutor is going after them because they have the eyewitnesses.
Well, this ``Forensic File'' opens like this: All of the witnesses at the scene of the crime said no crime was committed, right down the line. In fact, they have even submitted printed evidence. Yet the prosecutor thinks otherwise.
I don't think that would be a very interesting ``Forensic Files'' because what it says is no crime got committed.
Now, can we talk about whether or not there was an overrun in the building? There may have been. But I don't know if everybody is paying attention, but that happens a lot in government. If we are going to actually accuse someone of criminal behavior because of a project overrun in Federal Government, we had better start budgeting a lot more for prisons because that is the norm here.
I hate it because I came from a world where you lost your job if you went over budget and over time. But that is just a part of the way this place works.
Two minutes of testimony, seven members in the Banking Committee, present on that day, saying that they do not believe there was criminal intent sends a very clear message to a young U.S. attorney with a dream in the DC District: Why don't you come talk to people who were at the alleged scene of the crime?
We said we do not believe there was any criminal intent--2 minutes.
Mr. President, as a matter of fact, the other thing, if I could ask unanimous consent to have another two pages printed in the Record, which are some of the allegations that were being quoted from a press report that are patently wrong.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
Mr. President, this is a case where we had members on the committee responding to news reports that were proven wrong.
Folks, I thought this was probably going to end this way, and it is one of the reasons why I decided to invite myself to a tour when the President went to this building to take a look at it.
I was there with the President. He was very kind, shook my hand, and welcomed me to participate in this tour.
I saw nothing there. I saw a few things--frustration. You know, you have got the historic commission and everybody else controlling the state of the project. But I certainly didn't see any criminal activity. I certainly didn't see any of these alleged rooftop garden terraces, water features, VIP elevators, special marble. They had to take it down and put it back up. Building in DC is complicated.
So almost all of the allegations were disproven. And yet we still have a prosecutor that is trying to pursue a criminal prosecution of the Chair of the Federal Reserve.
The night that it was announced, I made the statement that I will take this allegation seriously. But I am concerned that it comes from someone without consultation with Big DOJ. I don't think Pam Bondi or any of the senior people in the DOJ knew anything about it. Without consultation with the White House, they decided to pursue this investigation.
So they put me in an untenable position. If I am quiet on that Sunday night and don't say something, Monday morning, we may wake up to a very different market. If, all of a sudden, the Federal Reserve, that since its creation has been considered independent and separate from many Presidents who have been angry with them--Democrats and Republicans alike--I felt like, if I didn't put my foot down and say, ``No one is going to fill that seat until this investigation is done,'' that we could have literally had headlines across all financial markets that the United States no longer has an independent Federal Reserve.
Unless you track it as closely as I have, in my current role as Senator and in my past role as a partner at Pricewaterhouse, tracking financial or banking institutions, you may not be able to appreciate this. But, folks, this is real. The Federal Reserve is the gold standard for central banks, and its independence is critically important. It is critically important for us continuing to have the gold standard for the economy, the gold standard for the rule of law.
We cannot allow some junior U.S. attorney--assistant U.S. attorney-- in some jurisdiction here, all of a sudden, to play with fire. They didn't know what they were doing. They didn't look through the second- and third-order effects, and, quite honestly, they exposed the President in the process.
I find myself in a position where I want to reaffirm what I said very directly on that Sunday night before the markets opened on Monday morning: I will not allow any Board member for the Federal Reserve to go through the Banking Committee for a Chair or for replacement of expired terms until this matter is settled. I have no problem with us having an investigation, like we should with so many other areas of the government.
I would like to have oversight of the East Wing construction to make sure that that stays on target and doesn't go over budget. I would like to have oversight into the Qatari 747 as the new Air Force One--kind of ``Air Force lite'' because you can't take it out of the United States. All of those are taxpayer dollars being spent, and we should have visibility into that.
So count me in for doing an investigation for the comments on that day. The 2 minutes of testimony, that is the only reason I am on the floor today and refusing to allow a Fed Board member to be confirmed, because I feel that strongly. As a matter of fact, it may take us to a new low in terms of a vindictive prosecution. And if you think Arctic Frost was bad, if you think some of the other investigations in the Obama era were bad, ladies and gentlemen, we are setting a new low that could make that look like child's play.
For that reason, until the investigation is resolved, I cannot and I will not vote to support anyone on the Federal Reserve in my remaining tenure in the U.S. Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. President, last month, I came to the floor after the tragic killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti and talked about what had happened in my State.
Renee Good left behind three kids, including a 6-year-old. When she was shot and killed by an ICE agent, her final words to the officer who shot her were, ``I am not mad at you.''
Alex Pretti was a VA intensive care nurse and guardian angel who did one of the most selfless jobs one could think of, caring for our veterans, often in their final hours.
Last Saturday, I met with the workers who were on the shift that, only 2 weeks before, was that same shift of workers that were on when they found out that their coworker Alex had been killed.
His last words were to a woman who had been pushed down by Border Patrol, and his last words were, ``Are you OK?''
His fellow workers at the VA recounted to me what a kindhearted person he was, how every patient felt like they were the only patient. Other family members of patients had remarked about that too.
The coworkers told me how he was the kind of guy who would fill in on the shifts when someone had a family emergency or just needed time off, and he would fill in for them on their shift, including that Saturday morning shift.
Both Renee and Alex should be alive today, and as we honor their memories, I am on the floor again today following the administration's announcement of its plan to finally end Operation Metro Surge and drawn down the thousands of federalized agents that aren't just in Minneapolis or St. Paul--that, actually, I don't think people quite understand. They are all over our State. They are in the suburbs. They are in small towns.
The number of calls that we get--my office is handling hundreds and hundreds of cases right now, but the cases of just someone who is in the store and gets stopped because they are someone of color or the videos of two White friends with one Latino friend, and it is the Latino they would go up to and say, ``Are you legal?'' And the Latino says, ``Yes, I am,'' and they still throw them in the car, maybe because they could get a bounty. The number of people that were stopped multiple times, the Somali police officers who are off duty that were taken out of their car.
The stories go on and on. You can't have 3,000 ICE agents in a metro area. And, again, they also went rural in a big, big way, but in a metro area, where they outnumber the number of sworn police officers in our 10 biggest police departments, which includes Minneapolis and St. Paul, they were triple the number of sworn police officers in Minneapolis and St. Paul.
But for more than 2 months, Minnesotans stood together. They stared down ICE, and they never blinked. They marched--and I was there, 50,000 strong in 10 below zero weather--peacefully. And what I will never forget is 50,000 people marching peacefully, filling up the entire streets of Minneapolis peacefully, and then less than 12 hours, 24 hours later, 6 Border Patrol guys shot a guy with a cell phone in his hand in the back. They couldn't handle that.
So ICE is withdrawing from Minnesota. It is good. We are glad they are leaving our State, let me be clear. And when I talked to Director Homan about 10 days ago, he said this was the timetable, and they must follow through. He said they would first push out the Border Patrol agents and send them home. And they did that in the number of a couple hundred. And now they are bringing home the remaining Metro Surge ICE agents to get to the original footprint.
But ICE withdrawing from Minnesota is just the beginning. We need accountability for the lives lost and the extraordinary abuse of power in the hands of these agents.
And we, of course, must see a complete overhaul of the Agency. And I do not know how anyone can justify $75 billion extra dollars for this Agency, making them bigger than the FBI,
For months, ICE has made my State less safe. It is not just a horrific shooting; we have also seen repeated violations of the constitutional rights of the people of Minnesota. I do say to our colleagues, if you believe in the First Amendment, in the right to assemble, then show it. If you believe in the Second Amendment and that Alex Pretti had a right to be a lawful gun owner--and it was the Border Patrol agents that took his gun out of his holster, all he was holding was a cell phone--then show it.
If you believe in the Fourth Amendment and the right against search and seizure and that you can't have armed agents ramming through an elder Hmong man's door, pulling him out in his underwear and throwing him in a car, only to find out, after they drove him around for an hour, that they had the wrong guy and that, in fact, the guy they were going after had been in prison for years and that this Hmong man had done nothing wrong and was the son of a beloved nurse that treated American soldiers in Vietnam.
Those are the stories that people are never going to forget in my State: a fourth grader from Columbia Heights and her mom detained by ICE on the way to school; the little 5-year-old, little Liam, standing there scared in his blue hat with floppy ears and his Spider-Man backpack.
Those two kids, the fourth grader and Liam sent to Texas, and the judge--they sent him to Texas without even waiting to see what the court said. And then the court said: No, can't do that. And then they had to bring him back from Texas in his little blue hat with the little floppy ears.
This administration also sent a 2-year-old to Texas. My staff and many other local lawmakers worked through the night on that case--came back from Texas.
It should never have come to this. A court case was pending, and they put a 2-year-old on a plane when her mom was waiting for her in Minnesota.
These are just a few of the stories. As our local police have repeatedly made clear in the cities and in the suburbs and in the rural areas, ICE's actions have not made us safer. They have made us so much less safe. They have taken taxpayer money--at some estimates, $18 million a week--and spent it on hotel rooms that should have been used for families visiting from Wisconsin and Iowa and Canada that like to go to the Mall of America in the middle of the winter.
Those hotel rooms should have been used by people in Greater Minnesota that want to come in and go ice fishing or enjoy skiing in our State. But instead we had 3,000 ICE agents in Bloomington, MN, alone, our biggest suburb--1,000 ICE agents in their hotel rooms. Think of how much money that is and all the overtime for the police officers that could have been following up on child cases and could have been helping on burglary cases and could have been helping citizens with the trust that they have built over the years.
And that trust, so much on the line now, but kept intact because of how those local police officers throughout our State and local sheriff deputies have handled this travesty. This goes way beyond welcoming help for violent offenders, which we would, or a fraud investigation-- way beyond all of that.
In fact, the opposite has happened because some highly experienced prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney's Office in Minnesota, who have been there through Republican-appointed U.S. attorneys and Democratic- appointed U.S. attorneys, who lead and have led the cases on fraud, the important cases to go after the stealing of taxpayer money, and brought 80-some cases already and won major convictions in court, those prosecutors who are so well-respected in our State were asked to investigate Renee Good's wife after she was gunned down. And they said: No, we will not do that, and they stepped down.
It reminded me of the decorated war veteran in New York in their U.S. Attorney's Office when asked to dismiss a case that had been rightfully brought against then-Mayor Eric Adams. That prosecutor, who had clerked for conservative Justices, a member of the Federalist Society, he said in a letter to the Justice Department:
That is what those assistant U.S. attorneys, including the former acting head of the U.S. Attorney's Office that had been installed by the Trump administration on my recommendation who did an incredible job through the horrific assassination of former Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband and also was there at the side for the families when those little children were gunned down through stained glass windows at Annunciation Church--those are the people that they messed with and asked them to do something they felt were unethical, and as a result, all of the prosecutors that were heading up the righteous fraud investigations and prosecutions are no longer in that office.
So you tell me how these actions have made our State more safe. It is the opposite: School attendance down; families living in fear; people staying home; restaurants and businesses feeling the impact; Operation Metro Surge costing our Minnesota economy an estimated $80 million per week, all for the shock and awe, where such a small percentage of the people that they apprehended were involved in violent crime.
At its peak, one study showed that the surge cost Federal, State, and local governments at least $18 million every single week. The fact is, Operation Metro Surge put our State at the center of America's heartbreak, but it also put us at the center of America's courage and America's hope.
Every day across our State, people did extraordinary things. Ordinary people did extraordinary things. They drove other kids to school. They brought food to their neighbors. They showed up for small businesses. Teachers and other school leaders stood up and protected their students, organized food drives and computer drives.
Attorneys across our State at private law firms took ICE to court to enforce people's constitutional rights. And judges appointed by Presidents of both parties, including our conservative chief judge of the Federal District Court of Minnesota issued opinions, and strongly worded opinions, demanding that people come into court unless their orders were followed.
Today, the administration's top border official Tom Homan announced the end of Operation Surge and the drawdown of the 3,000 ICE agents-- again, triple the amount of sworn police officers in the combined cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul--leaving only what he has called ``a small footprint.''
He has been straightforward with me since he arrived on the ground in Minnesota, straightforward with our chiefs, and we appreciate that. But we must be vigilant in making sure there is a real and thorough drawdown. We need transparent, objective investigations and justice for Renee Good and Alex Pretti and the many others who had their rights violated by this administration.
There must--must--be new leadership at the Department of Homeland Security, and Kristi Noem must resign. That is what you do with $75 billion? You put bounties on legal citizens? You break out windows of people with disabilities who are born in this country and drag them to a detention center? That is what you do with $75 billion of taxpayer money?
You take Hmong elders and throw them out of their house in their underwear with their Crocs on their feet in below-zero weather and throw them into a car? You stop off-duty police officers just because they are not White? That is what you do with $75 billion? So that is why she must step down.
And there must be major reforms to immigration enforcement, including a complete overhaul of this Agency. Americans want Federal agents to abide by the same code of conduct as local law enforcement and be held accountable when they don't. Americans want transparency. Federal agents shouldn't be masked. They should be required to use body cameras. But that is just the tip of the iceberg.
We must end roving patrols. Federal agents should not enter private property without a judicial warrant. We must end the bounty system that incentivizes arrest without cause and has taken down numerous people, multiple people, hundreds of people in our
Today, a number of our colleagues, including myself, voted against continuing to fund ICE. Budget shows our values. That extra $75 billion, as I explained, triples the Agency's funding, giving it more money than the FBI. That was wrong.
That money could have gone to local enforcement, Affordable Care Act tax credits for 3 years, and $75 billion would have paid for everyone in the country to get their tax credit extended to help them pay for their premiums under the Affordable Care Act.
An occupying force was in our State. They tried to sow chaos and fear, but Minnesota didn't take the bait. As Bruce Springsteen sings in his new song ``The Streets of Minneapolis'':
We have shown the world how to protect democracy and take care of our neighbors, and we are going to continue to stand up for accountability, for justice, for change.
And when people ask me: What can we do? Well, you do that. You continue to stand up.
When people outside our State say: What can we do to help Minnesota? Well, now, with ICE agents leaving--maybe you want to wait until the weather warms up just a little--you can come and visit our great State. You can fill up those hotel rooms that were taken over by ICE agents and go visit incredible places in our State, where Prince got his start.
You can go to First Avenue. You can go to the Mall of America. You can go up north or down south in Minnesota and see the incredible bike trails and beautiful places and Lake Superior, the most superior lake of them all.
So that is what we want you to do. We want you to come to our State and visit. We want you to invest in our State. We want you to start businesses in our State. We want you to send your kids to school in our State. We want people to come and work in our State because we have shown the country and the world what we are all about.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
Mr. President, I want to set the stage for where we are at this moment, what just happened. Republicans voted to move forward on a bipartisan appropriations bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security, which includes, among other things, ICE funding, TSA funding, FEMA funding, and the Democrats voted no.
Now, that is not all. Right about now, there is a bus leaving. There is a bus leaving the Capitol grounds and headed for an airport. Democrats are on that bus who just voted to defund the paycheck of the TSA agent making $40,000 a year, to hop on a plane, funded by your tax dollars, to go to Munich, to go to Europe, and badmouth American foreign policy. They will be sipping wine with the global elites, telling them: Don't listen to President Trump. That is not who we are.
I have got news for you: The American people have weighed in, and they did in November of 2024, and this new direction of foreign policy is the ascendant view.
But outside of the foreign policy debate, just how offensive is it that they voted to defund DHS and are going to fly transatlantic on the taxpayer dime and trash talk America.
That won't get reported probably many places. The corrupt media covers for the Democrats day in and day out around here. That is one of the things I have learned in my 3 years in the Senate. The hypocrisy is insane. That is where they are headed.
In a broader sense, where are we? For my Republican colleagues, I hope you appreciate what this is, this moment, because this isn't some isolated incident. This is a 10-year struggle for commonsense Americans who have pushed back against a radical open borders policy that has been pushed by the Democrats.
President Trump won in 2016 on a few issues, but the electrical cord that began when he came down the escalator, that continues to this day, is taking on illegal immigration and the forgotten men and women of this country whose jobs were initially displaced when the failed policies of the politicians of this town sent their jobs overseas--the towns that I grew up in--and then when they were looking for new jobs, their wages were suppressed, and their jobs went to illegal immigrants. The Democrats have never understood that. They have never understood that Americans were upset about that.
Then for the 4 years previous to this, Joe Biden's term, Joe Biden let in 15 million--million--people. One million is a lot of people. Five million is a lot of people. Fifteen million people came into this country illegally. We don't know who most of them are. We don't even know where they are. What we do know is that literally tens of thousands of them are murderers; hundreds of thousands of them are violent criminals.
The left has tried to destroy this country through this open borders policy because we are all citizens of the world. Borders are just arbitrary lines on a map. That is where the modern Democrat Party is. They don't actually believe that America, as a sovereign country, should be able to tell people who can come and who has to leave.
So that is what this whole thing is about. It isn't about Minnesota or some recent event; this is about the Democrats failing to accept the verdict from the American people--that they sent President Trump back into the Oval Office to fix mass migration, to take on mass migration with mass deportations.
Regardless of the antics that happened here today on their ``no'' vote and flying with the globalists in Europe, it will not change that agenda. It is happening whether you like it or not.
Thank God we front-loaded in the Working Families Tax Cut money for deportations and tens of billions for detention centers. Two hundred thousand Americans have applied to be ICE agents because they love this great country, and they don't want it destroyed.
This is another hissy fit along the way by the Democrats who refuse to accept the political reality that they lost on this issue. So as far as I am concerned, we can spend the next year debating this on this floor. This is a home game for Republicans. But what you are doing to the American people, what you are doing to FEMA, what you are doing to the people who rely on their communities to be rebuilt, the TSA agents that go to work every day, the Coast Guard, is shameful.
Joe Biden opened up our border. It is literally unprecedented in American history that a President would say: We are not going to enforce our immigration laws. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama deported millions of people.
This is an effort by the Democrats--this debate--to kneecap immigration enforcement, to kneecap ICE. They lost the issue on the front end of the election. Now they want to make it so hard for ICE to do their jobs that deportations come to a halt. That is the truth, and anybody in this town who tells you otherwise is just spinning.
They don't want people deported because they are importing a voter base that they think will give them power. They are not even hiding behind this anymore. They have lost the argument with American citizens, and they think that if they flood this country with illegal immigrants--and by the way, you shouldn't have to prove you are an American citizen to vote. That is their position. You shouldn't have to show photo ID, which is broadly supported even among Democrat voters. Why? Why would they do that? Even though their voters don't want that, even though their voters want photo ID to be established when you vote, why would they be opposed to that? Because they want people who shouldn't be able to vote--illegal immigrants or fraudsters--to vote for them. That is the truth.
So we have now the most secure border in the history of our country, and we are trying to execute on the immigration laws that we have on the books that have been voted for by Republicans and Democrats alike, and Presidents of both parties have enforced those laws.
This is about the 21-point plan. If you think it is such a good idea, put that 21-point plan on the floor, and let's
We heard people being talked about here on the Senate floor. I want to mention a few names that no Democrat will ever utter: Laken Riley, Rachel Morin, Jocelyn Nungaray, Kayla Hamilton. These are American daughters, American sisters who were murdered by illegal aliens.
By the way, Laken Riley's murderer wasn't a previously convicted violent criminal. So if that is your test of who should be deported, it didn't help Laken Riley's family.
My priority--and the reason why I have been on this floor so many times about this issue--my priority is for Americans. Our immigration laws are put in place for one reason: to benefit America and Americans.
The rhetoric that has come from the left on this and my Democrat colleagues--we talk about, why was Minnesota a flashpoint? It is the sanctuary city status, the nine sanctuary jurisdictions in this country. In them, ICE agents are 590 times more likely to be assaulted. Since January of last year, there has been a 1,347-percent increase in assaults against ICE officers, a 3,200-percent increase in vehicular attacks. And don't tell me Tim Walz doesn't have something to do with that, and don't tell me that Mayor Frey doesn't have something to do with that, with the rhetoric. Even Senators on this floor, you know, called it Trump's secret police and the gestapo and Nazis. Knock it off. I hope you know better, but some people are actually listening to you. You have created conditions where confrontations are more likely.
There are deportations happening all over this country, in red States and blue States alike. You don't see what you see in sanctuary jurisdictions because they are cooperating.
Let's be clear what sanctuary status really means to the American people, OK? Local authorities will not tell ICE agents when illegal alien rapists are being let out of prison. That is what it means practically. They hate Donald Trump so much and they believe in open borders so much or they want new voters in this country for them so much, they crave for power so much that they are willing to let an illegal immigrant rapist back out on the streets.
A murderer. A burglar. Nope, we are not telling you. And oh, by the way, we are not going to send 9-1-1 to help you if you have a problem.
This is insane.
So to my Republican colleagues, let's put all of those issues in front of the American people. I am not afraid of this debate at all. Bring it on.
What is sad is that the Democrats continue to play the Ole game here. They negotiate a deal, and then they hold it up. We saw this with the longest government shutdown in American history just a couple months ago, and now here we are again with DHS funding. Meanwhile, they are sipping wine and eating caviar in Europe. I went to Munich last year.
It is also worth pointing out, by the way, that 2 years ago almost to the day, we were here. Those of us who thought that ``bipartisan immigration plan'' was terrible--and it was, which is why it fell apart; it made illegal immigration easier--we had to hold the floor all weekend long--in a bipartisan affair, by the way--to get Ukraine funding done in time for Chuck Schumer to deliver $60 billion to Ukraine at the Munich Security Conference.
What I have learned in 3 years here is that the Munich Security Conference for Democrats is like the Super Bowl. This draw to commiserate with fellow Wilsonians is a powerful drug. I don't know why in the world Democrats get to vote no on this and fly to Munich.
If the American people had any idea what went on in this town, they would be way more upset than they are right now. They expect us to come up here and to work on their behalf, for Americans, for the American people, for Laken Riley's family, for Kayla Hamilton, who was autistic, who was raped and murdered in her apartment for the $3 that she had on her so an illegal immigrant could go to Target with his buddy and spend the 3 bucks.
Why don't we hear about those stories? Because it is not convenient to the narrative.
That is what we are fighting against and who we are fighting for-- that is who I am fighting for--and if it were up to me, we would be on this floor every single day fighting for Kayla Hamilton, fighting for Laken Riley, and for the countless other daughters of this country who have been raped and murdered by illegal immigrants.
Todd Lyons, earlier today, testified--OK, just to tell you how sick this is--that in Colorado, ICE wanted to perform an operation in Colorado to deport illegal alien Tren de Aragua gang members from an apartment complex. So they tried to work with the local authorities in that sanctuary State. Guess what happened. Protesters were there, but the illegal immigrant gang members were all gone. They had been tipped off.
I actually can't believe this is happening in my country. I can't believe somebody's instinct with this crazy, suicidal empathy would be to protect an illegal immigrant gang member who could very easily and has--there are some dangerous people--murdered a family member and terrorized a community. They would rather tip them off than to have them deported. These are the facts.
So what should we do?
Here is what I think: I think it is actually an opportunity for us to strengthen our immigration laws. The Democrats want to kneecap ICE. I have submitted the Protect America Act for debate. It would do four things:
One, it would end sanctuary city status for good.
Two, it would increase penalties for illegal entry and illegal reentry. A lot of these crimes are being committed by people who have been deported and they come back. That has happened.
By the way, if you come here illegally, I think you ought to have jail time. As a former prosecutor as the attorney general of Missouri, I can tell you that people responded to incentives. They knew when we had a partnership with Federal prosecutors in St. Louis that, if they were being busted for a Federal crime, they were going to jail. If it were a State crime and if Kim Gardner--the Soros-funded prosecutor in St. Louis at the time--were handling the case, they literally would laugh in the back seat of the cop car because they knew they would be out later that day.
No more catch and release. If we are serious about it, no more catch- and-release. It is over.
Three, if you assault an ICE officer, we are increasing those penalties too. Protest all you want--for God's sake, this is America, and we have different points of view--but you don't get to interfere in the operations of Federal law enforcement. Even if you really believe you are wearing the white hat, you don't get to do that.
Fourth, as for this NGO network that has been created and that is fomenting this vitriol and the operations that are putting ICE officers and citizens at risk, they need to lose their nonprofit status.
So, if we are serious about the problem, that is what we will do. But I will tell you what we are not going to do: We are not succumbing no matter how long it takes--if it is one day. Let's just say my Democrat friends come back from Munich and they feel really good about themselves because a bunch of European elites has told them all the things they want to hear and vice versa. We are not coming back here and going to make it harder for ICE to do their jobs. We are not doing it. I will do everything in my power--and I know a lot of other folks on my side of the aisle will do it too--to prevent that from ever happening because the American people saw what a disaster it was to have Democrats in charge of this country. We had a secure border. Joe Biden literally unsecured that border on day one, and we had 15 million people come here illegally.
We are not going back. The American people saw that. They voted for President Trump. He was very clear about it. This wasn't a footnote in his campaign. This was a central theme. You may not like it, but that is what our Republic is about.
For all the talk of saving democracy and sticking up for democracy I hear from the other side, it is all nonsense.
So I don't know when--you know, I guess we will be back here in a week or something, but the reality is not going to change no matter how much Chuck Schumer tries to villainize ICE agents. No matter how many times I hear my colleagues from the other side try to stir up people, it will not change this very basic reality: We have front-loaded money for deportations, and those deportations will continue, and there is nothing you can do about it.
Now, if you want to make a proposal to stop that, put it on the floor. You will lose, but I want them to know and also my colleagues that I am 100-percent committed to this. It is central to the idea of being a sovereign country. No sane country in the history of the world would do this. By the way, in speaking of heading over to Europe, ask them how mass migration is working out for them. They have done it, and it isn't working.
So, if you have got any advice coming back from that side of the Atlantic, I am not really interested on this topic or on censorship. Maybe you can deliver the message that they ought to step up for their own defense of their own continent in a more meaningful way. Now, that might not make you popular over there, but that is the message that I delivered when I went over last year.
But as it relates to illegal immigration, the deportations will continue, and I hope the American people understand that the people who just voted to defund ICE are sipping champagne in Europe, bad-mouthing the United States of America's foreign policy. That is who they are. That is the reality.
This debate will continue. But as far as I am concerned, Republicans, we should be playing offense here. Let's strengthen our immigration laws. Let's treat this as seriously of a problem for our country as it really is.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
