Senate Republicans say President Donald Trump’s decision to put a $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund on hold may not be enough to move a multibillion-dollar spending package for immigration and border enforcement.
The Justice Department announced Monday it would not challenge a court ruling temporarily halting the fund. The creation of the fund created bipartisan backlash on Capitol Hill, with some lawmakers suggesting it could be used as a “slush fund” to boost Trump allies. For more than a week, Senate Republicans have refused to advance a broader spending bill unless it included parameters or guardrails for the fund.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Monday that the DOJ decision “effectively” shuts down the fund.
“The way the statement is worded, I think it’s clear they’re not proceeding with the fund, but whether or not that’s sufficient to satisfy our members is something we’re still sorting through,” Thune said.
But several Republicans said the issue is not resolved and they are not yet ready to advance the billions in immigration funding as part of a budget reconciliation package. Ahead of the midterms, the White House is eager to move the spending package, which could pass the Senate on a party-line vote.
Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy, a GOP critic of the fund, said he was glad the fund is on hold, but added the administration had little choice given the court order. He cautioned that the move “doesn’t tell me whether they’re planning to appeal. It doesn’t tell me whether the administration is backing off the idea. Doesn’t tell me anything, except they’re going to follow the law, which you have to.”
West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, chair of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, said she “still have a lot of questions” surrounding the fund.
Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska told reporters on Monday that she is still looking for a commitment from the Trump administration to eliminate the fund completely to help move the funding bill forward.
“Is it gonna be completely eliminated? That’s the question that I have,” Murkowski said. “That would make [reconciliation] easier. “
Another Republican, Utah Sen. John Curtis, said he is still in favor of seeing “robust” guardrails placed on the fund, adding that the legislative pushback is a sign “of the three branches of government working.”
“I have a lot of unanswered questions,” Curtis said. “It’s not enough for me to have the court’s pushback. I just want to make sure this thing doesn’t move forward in its current form.”
Thune said that the Trump administration dropping the fund entirely could allow the Senate to begin voting on the spending package “at some time this week.”
Democrats, meanwhile, continued to bash the fund and vowed to force votes to ban it, including by offering amendments to the reconciliation bill.
“A promise from Trump is worthless,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a speech on the Senate floor. “If Trump and Republicans are truly abandoning this corrupt scheme, they should have zero problem banning it in law.”
Thune said before the DOJ announcement that he didn’t expect to see Republican support for those amendments.
“Obviously the Democrats are going to give us an opportunity to vote on lots of different amendment ideas, but if the administration effectively shuts it down and makes that very, very clear then that, to me, should answer the question,” Thune said.
Thune also reiterated Monday his longstanding commitment to keep the reconciliation bill as narrow as possible to move it quickly through Congress.
“I think the best way to get the reconciliation bill finished and across the finish line is to confine it to the issues that we were addressing in the initial bill,” — money for Customs and Border Protection and for Immigration and Customs Enforcement — “and funding it for the next three years through the end of the Trump administration,” Thune said.
