Senate Funding Package on Hold Due to Sanctuary Cities Debate
The Senate seemed geared up to fund a significant portion of the government on Thursday, but Republican Senator Lindsey Graham from South Carolina has now put that on hold. His reasoning? A push for stricter policies against sanctuary cities.
Graham, known for his firm stance on immigration, is insisting on a vote regarding a bill that would make it a crime for city employees to endorse sanctuary policies. Additionally, there’s pressure from South Carolina Republicans to repeal a recently passed provision that stops senators from seeking financial damages after the seizure of a colleague’s phone records during a 2020 election investigation.
“We cannot live in a country where people are free to choose laws they don’t like,” Graham stated on the Senate floor, addressing the sanctuary policy issue. He added, “If you don’t enforce the law, you should literally go to jail.”
It’s uncertain if Graham’s proposed amendments will actually be voted on. Other Republican senators are also seeking votes on various proposed amendments, which include eliminating earmarks, cutting refugee aid, and stopping funding for the National Endowment for Democracy within the five-bill spending package.
Graham’s decision to delay the funding package aligns with former President Trump’s sentiments, with many lawmakers urging for a fast approval of a spending deal. A partial government shutdown is scheduled to begin at 12:01 a.m. Saturday.
According to an agreement between the White House and Senate Democrats, the Senate is anticipated to pass a two-week extension for Department of Homeland Security funding while simultaneously approving another five-bill spending measure. Democrats are resisting DHS funding that lacks immigration enforcement reforms, especially considering the recent shooting of an ICU nurse in Minneapolis.
Trump expressed a hope that both parties would reach a much-needed bipartisan agreement. Meanwhile, Graham argued that the compromise with Democrats compromised too much ground and emphasized the need for Republicans to stand firm regarding Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
“There are a lot of people out there who feel frustrated by not having that moment,” Graham noted. “I think it’s time to reevaluate.”
Others in the Republican party have shared concerns that the latest spending legislation won’t provide sufficient funding for DHS throughout the entire fiscal year. Senator Rick Scott from Florida made his stance clear, saying, “I support ICE. I support the Department of Homeland Security. I’m not going to support anything like this. It’s crazy not to fund the Department of Homeland Security.”
Graham’s other amendment aims to broaden Smith’s capacity to file lawsuits for $500,000 per infraction in connection with his “Arctic Frost” research. The initial Senate bill, which was part of a resolution to end the fall 2025 government shutdown, limited senators to suing the government, even after Smith had accessed the phone records of at least one House member and many Republican groups. The House had repealed the provision last Thursday, which was viewed by many as a deliberate move to complicate Senate operations.
Graham expressed a desire to expand the “private cause of action” so that other impacted groups could also bring lawsuits against the government.
“I’m not going to give up on the idea that we should hold Jack Smith accountable,” he asserted. “You interrupted me, [House] speaker [Mike] Johnson. I’ll never forget this…If you think I’m going to give up on this, you really don’t know me.”
