PHILADELPHIA – U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers seized a half gallon of gamma-butyrolactone, known on the street and at raves as “Blue Nitro” or liquid ecstasy, in Philadelphia on April 25.
CBP officers seized 8 bottles of GBL…
SAN DIEGO — On April 28, U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers at the San Ysidro and Otay Mesa Ports of Entry thwarted two separate smuggling attempts, seizing more than 225 pounds of cocaine and discovering a woman hidden in a vehicle’s…
The lead assistant federal prosecutor for Rhode Island's civil division is under investigation for allegedly withholding information in an immigration case, according to an order from the Ocean State's top federal judge.
The federal government is seeking to revoke the citizenship of a former U.S. diplomat currently serving 15 years in prison after pleading guilty to secretly acting as an agent of the Cuban government for decades, the U.S. Department of Justice announced Friday.
With autonomous artificial intelligence agents now able to take action without explicit instructions from — or the awareness of — their human owners, the bar must confront whether existing frameworks like informed consent and client privilege will be sufficient on the day an AI agent calls seeking counsel, say attorneys at Morrison Cohen.
This week, Congress moved closer to advancing legislation that would add about $70 billion in funding to immigration enforcement agencies through 2029, which is in addition to the $170 billion already provided last year. If enacted, the proposal would mark yet another circumvention of the regular government funding process—which requires bipartisan negotiations—to fund these agencies.
This funding is being pursued through the reconciliation process, which bypasses the 60-vote threshold needed in the Senate to overcome a filibuster. For the second time, congressional leaders aim to use reconciliation to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and its subagencies, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
Since February 14, Democrats have refused to fund ICE and CBP unless meaningful reforms, including stronger warrant requirements and professional law enforcement standards, in an attempt to rein in aggressive conduct that has resulted in multiple deaths, including of U.S. citizens. Those efforts failed.
The result is a proposal that could fund ICE and CBP for years to come, with no meaningful congressional oversight. All of this funding would be available to the agencies through the end of fiscal year 2029.
What’s in the bill?
The proposal allocates $72 billion in new funding with nearly all of it going to immigration enforcement. It includes:
- ICE: $38.2 billion to expand and sustain enforcement operations by hiring and equipping personnel across its divisions, supporting detention and removal transportation, upgrading technology and facilities, and expanding 287(g) agreements with local law enforcement. $7.5 billion of this funding is specifically earmarked for ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations for “non-immigration” purposes.
- CBP: $26 billion to hire and equip personnel, upgrade surveillance and inspection technologies, conduct screenings of unaccompanied children, and support DHS’ border enforcement mission.
- DHS: $5 billion to fund several broad purposes, including those related to the Homeland Security and Judiciary portions of the reconciliation bill passed last year, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBBA). In OBBBA, DHS received a similar pot of money—often referred to as a “slush” fund given its broad purpose—of $10 billion. DHS has used those funds in legally suspect ways, including to cover DHS employees’ salaries during the government shutdown.
- Department of Justice (DOJ): $1.5 billion for a variety of purposes, including enforcing and administering federal immigration laws under the DOJ’s authority.
How does this compare to previous ICE and CBP budgets?
ICE and CBP are already among the most highly-funded law enforcement agencies in the federal government. In recent years, Congress has increased funding to both agencies through its annual appropriations process at the expense of agencies that process immigration benefits. Nevertheless, this proposal, especially combined with last year’s reconciliation bill, represents a historically high increase in immigration enforcement funding.
The proposal is nearly four times ICE’s annual budget from FY 2025. Combined with the $75 billion ICE already received last year through OBBBA, the agency will have received over eleven times its 2025 budget. While the funds can be used through 2029, the Congressional Budget Office notes that there is considerable uncertainty over the pace of spending given the lack of guardrails on when the money can be spent.
This is a big concern, as ICE received $45 billion for detention through OBBBA to be used through 2029 but instead decided to use the overwhelming majority ($38 billion) of it immediately to convert warehouses into immigration detention centers. At a recent conference in Arizona, a DHS official in charge of spending funding from OBBBA said that the agency was on track to “obligate 75% of the funds” by the end of September this year.
Similarly, CBP, which would receive funding for its border operations in this proposal, would receive 3.5 times its 2025 budget. Again, this funding is available until 2029, but there are no proposed constraints on it being used sooner.
In addition, DHS would receive $5 billion beyond its annually appropriated amount to fund broad categories of priorities, including immigration-related provisions of last year’s OBBBA. The administration has so far been able to rely on its own interpretations when deciding how to use similar funds provided under the OBBBA.
What makes this particularly concerning is not just the amount—but the structure. By using the reconciliation process, Congress would effectively provide multi-year, lump-sum funding with fewer mechanisms for oversight or course correction. In contrast, the annual appropriations process allows lawmakers to revisit funding levels each year, adjust priorities, and impose conditions on how funds are spent.
What’s being foregone to fund immigration enforcement at these levels?
The tradeoffs here are significant. By channeling such a large share of federal resources into immigration enforcement—through a process that minimizes oversight—congressional leaders are also choosing not to invest those funds elsewhere.
In April, the Trump administration submitted its funding priorities for FY 2027. While lawmakers are considering giving billions more to ICE and CBP, the White House has proposed massive cuts to essential domestic programs. $70 billion could instead fund:
- Biomedical research for 4 years
- Student higher education grants for 5 years
- Energy assistance for low-income households (LIHEAP) for 6 years.
- Job Corps, a workforce development program, for 14 years
- Pre-school development grants for 73 years
- Rural health programs for 242 years
Instead, taxpayer dollars are being directed away from helping people meet basic needs and toward further expanding immigration enforcement infrastructure.
What does this mean for the future of immigration enforcement funding?
This isn’t just a debate about funding levels—it’s a debate about Congress’ priorities. Reconciliation was never designed to serve as the primary vehicle for shaping complex, long-term policy in areas like immigration enforcement. Unlike the traditional government funding process, reconciliation lacks many of the guardrails that require agencies to report their activity, provide members of Congress access to detention facilities, or operate certain programs.
Should Congress commit $70 billion to expand federal enforcement capacity with fewer checks, fewer reporting requirements, and less flexibility to respond to changing conditions? That’s the choice this bill presents.
The Senate is expected to vote on the bill during the third week of May.
The post Senate Pushes Ahead with $70 Billion More for ICE and CBP, Excluding Accountability Measures appeared first on American Immigration Council.
Federal law permits federal firearms licensees ("FFLs") to transfer firearms to a person residing in the same state but who does not appear in person. These are "non-over-the-counter" ("NOTC") sales. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives ("ATF") proposes amending Department of Justice ("Department") regulations on NOTC sales. These proposed changes would remove restrictions limiting this option to background check-exempt transfers. The proposed rule would permit FFLs to conduct NOTC transfers while complying with background check requirements and adds remote identity proofing and electronic notices to chief law enforcement officers. These changes would provide greater flexibility for individuals lawfully purchasing firearms.
A D.C. federal judge said Thursday that the Trump administration violated her order banning warrantless civil immigration arrests in Washington, D.C., without officers first determining if an individual would likely escape before a warrant is secured, blaming agency guidance.
A man who pled to sufficient facts for drug charges will be allowed to withdraw his admission, Massachusetts' highest court said Thursday, finding that he was not properly warned about the immigration consequences of his plea.